Liminality as a Framework for Composition: Rhythmic Thresholds

Liminality as a Framework for Composition: Rhythmic Thresholds, Spectral Harmonies
and Afrological Improvisation
Stephen H. Lehman
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the
Requirements for the degree
of Doctoral of Musical Arts
in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
2012
ABSTRACT
Liminality as a Framework for Composition: Rhythmic Thresholds, Spectral Harmonies
and Afrological Improvisation
Stephen H. Lehman
This paper will examine the ways in which involvement with both French spectral music
and Afrological forms of improvisation has informed my current work as a composer. I
present a brief overview of the major concerns and preoccupations of both musics as well
as an account of the overlapping histories of spectral music and Afrological
improvisation, with particular attention to the concepts of liminality and rhythmic
thresholds in the light of recent music perception research. Finally, through an in-depth
analysis of two of my recent compositions, Echoes (2008) and Baltimore/Berlin (2008,
rev. 2011), I show how this ongoing inquiry allows us to think about composition in new
and fruitful ways.
Table of Contents
Prefatory Remarks
ii
Spectral Music
1
Afrological Improvisation
3
Spectral Music and Improvisation
5
Rhythmic Thresholds and Music Perception Research
10
Analysis of Echoes
21
Analysis of Baltimore/Berlin
28
Conclusion
41
Bibliography/Works Cited
43
Appendix 1: Echoes Score
47
Appendix 2: Baltimore/Berlin Score
56
i
Prefatory Remarks
After years as a performer and composer of improvised music, I first became aware of
spectral music in 2001, while studying for an M.A. in Music Composition at Wesleyan
University. Since then, much of my intense involvement with contemporary Western art
music, and with spectral music in particular, has been supported and encouraged by
academic institutions like Wesleyan, Columbia University, The Paris Conservatory
(CNSM), and the Institut de Recherche et Coordination Acoustique/Musique (IRCAM),
and through my collaborations with new music groups like the International
Contemporary Ensemble and the JACK quartet. In June 2009, when my CD recording
Travail, Transformation & Flow was released on Pi Recordings, I began to receive a
steady stream of inquiries about my synthesis of spectral harmony, highly structured
rhythmic materials, and improvisation. Colleagues, mentors, critics, serious listeners and
students reached out, wanting to know more about this particular aspect of my work.
I hope to respond to those inquiries more fully in this paper by examining the ways in
which involvement with both French spectral music and Afrological forms of
improvisation has informed my current work as a composer. I present a brief overview of
the major concerns and preoccupations of both musics as well as an account of the
overlapping histories of spectral music and Afrological improvisation, with particular
attention to the concepts of liminality and rhythmic thresholds in the light of recent music
perception research. Finally, through an in-depth analysis of two of my recent
compositions, Echoes (2008) and Baltimore/Berlin (2008, rev. 2011), I show how this
ongoing inquiry allows us to think about composition in new and fruitful ways.
ii
Spectral Music
In spectral music1 the physics of sound informs almost every compositional decision.
Timbre (attack, decay, overtone structure) provides the source material for orchestration,
harmony, duration and musical form. The most prominent overtones of a given sound – a
clarinet or a church bell, for example – are used to create a rich harmonic framework that
is organized according to frequency relationships, as opposed to the intervals of a musical
scale. This can be particularly useful when working with the harmonic series, where the
interval structure is fairly complex, but the frequency structure is rather simple. In
addition, individual overtones are assigned to specific instruments in an ensemble, and
blended together to create new harmonies derived from the physical structure of the
original sound source. This collection of compositional techniques, often referred to as
“orchestral synthesis” or “instrumental synthesis,” draws symbolically from the idea of
additive synthesis, in which simple sounds (traditionally, sine waves) are combined to
create more complex aggregates. The advent of computer music programs, digital
synthesis, and digital sound analysis in the early 1970s was instrumental in the
development of spectral music and provided composers with powerful new tools, capable
of handling the considerable computational strain associated with the detailed analysis
and synthesis of complex sounds.2 Following these compositional techniques, both timbre
and harmony are conceived of as the composite of more elementary sounds, and the
elision of these two musical categories may be the most important and durable idea to
have emerged from the spectral movement.
My own engagement with spectral music has been especially influenced by the work of
Gérard Grisey, and Tristan Murail, who became an important mentor for me at Columbia
University. While these are the two composers most closely associated with the spectral
movement, this music has developed in the historical context of earlier proto-spectral
1
Spectral music and spectral techniques represent an extensive collection of ideas about harmony and
orchestration and about composition in general. As a result, a comprehensive overview of the spectral
movement and the various organizing principles of the music would be well beyond the scope of this paper.
Fortunately, there already exists a good amount of excellent scholarship devoted to the basic compositional
techniques of spectral music (Fineberg 2000, Moscovitch 1997, and Rose 1996), and the cultural and
historical context in which the music first emerged (Drott 2009 and Anderson 2000).
2
See Dodge and Jerse (1997) for a comprehensive overview and history of additive synthesis techniques.
1
composers like Debussy, Scriabin, Varese, Messiaen, Scelsi, Ligeti, and Stockhausen.
There are also parallel streams, such as the Romanian spectral school, which includes
Dumitrescu, Radulescu and Avram. But the emergence of the French spectral movement
in the 1970s, and its subsequent evolution, seems to represent a particularly important
point of definition in the last forty years of contemporary Western art music.
In the context of this brief overview of spectral music, it is important to note that both
Murail and Grisey have expressed reservations about the idea of an all-encompassing
“spectral school” of composition, and have been hesitant to reduce their music to a finite
collection of compositional techniques. Both composers have instead sought to define
the spectral movement more broadly, as a collection of ideas and attitudes about
composition, placing particular emphasis on the phenomenology of perception and the
central role of hybrids and thresholds in their music. Here is Murail in 2000:
For me, this fascination with transforming objects and creating hybrids was
always there: it’s almost congenital. I think retrospectively that this idea, coupled
with the importance I (and others) place on working with harmony in a way that
completely controls it – giving strength to the formal construction – were the
basic ideas of spectral music. (Murail 2000)
2
Afrological Improvisation
Like the French spectral movement, Afrological forms of improvisation do not represent
a specific musical style or collection of techniques. In his 1996 article, “Improvised
Music After 1950: Afrological and Eurological Perspectives,” composer/theorist George
E. Lewis describes the terms Afrological and Eurological as referring “metaphorically to
musical belief systems and behavior that…exemplify particular kinds of musical ‘logic.’”
Lewis compares and contrasts Afrological and Eurological modes of improvisation and
argues that Afrological improvisation can be defined by the following tendencies (Lewis
1996):
•
An understanding of improvisation in which careful preparation, formalism,
and intellectual rigor are as privileged as spontaneity and real-time decision
making
•
A collaborative model in which the internalization of alternative value
systems is supported and encouraged
•
A preoccupation with the articulation of personality and the assertion of
individual agency through sound
•
An emphasis on the social instrumentality of sound and the potential for
improvisation to resist perceived restrictions on expression.
My own use of the term Afrological is also intended to be understood in a larger context
of African-American musical aesthetics, which includes improvisation, but also extends
beyond it. Composer/theorist Olly Wilson (1974) cites the following conceptual
tendencies, among others, as characteristic of African-American music across a wide
variety of artistic genres:
•
Metronomic Sense: Musical pulse that is perceptually salient and encourages a
psycho-physical response to music
•
Rhythmic Contrast: Polyrhythm and/or the off-beat placement of melodic
accents
•
Dominance of Percussion: A percussive approach to instrumental practice and
a preoccupation with percussion as an expressive musical element
3
•
A heterogeneous sound ideal that privileges a diverse collection of
instrumental timbres and musical perspectives
In my view, Lewis’s notion of Afrological improvisation and Wilson’s analysis of
African-American musical aesthetics can complement and reinforce one another. In
particular, Lewis’s notion of the internalization of alternative value systems in
improvisation seems to echo Wilson’s concept of “a heterogeneous sound ideal” in
African-American musical practices.
As a composer/performer deeply engaged with Afrological forms of improvisation, I
view my own work as part of a lineage of American creative music that includes, among
many others, Charlie Parker, Bud Powell, John Coltrane, Jackie McLean, Betty Carter,
Andrew Hill, Henry Threadgill, Anthony Braxton, George Lewis, Evan Parker, Mark
Dresser and Greg Osby.3 Despite representing a vast array of ideas about music and
improvisation, all of these musicians have produced influential and highly personal
bodies of work that remain rooted in the constellation of Afrological and AfricanAmerican music as understood by Lewis and Wilson. Furthermore, they have all pursued
creative strategies that foreground the role of the composer/performer and privilege a
collaborative model in which the exchange of ideas with performers in an ensemble is an
essential component of the compositional process. In fact, for many of these musicians,
the careful selection of collaborators is viewed as a crucial compositional decision. These
ideas play a central role in my own understanding of Afrological forms of improvisation,
and of establishing a highly collaborative musical environment driven by performer
agency – what music historian and cultural theorist Samuel A. Floyd (1995) has referred
to as “individuality within the aggregate.”
3
Having pursued formal studies with Braxton (Wesleyan University), Lewis (Columbia University), and
McLean (Hartt School of Music, University of Hartford), I have been particularly influenced by the musical
perspectives of these three composer/performers. See Lehman (2005) on Braxton and Lewis and (2008) on
McLean.
4
Spectral Music and Improvisation
In terms of socio-cultural context, geography, and institutional affiliation, spectral music
and Afrological forms of improvisation could hardly be more distinct. Yet, these two
musical histories do overlap, often in very meaningful ways that reveal an important set
of shared attitudes and ideas about music.
The Duke Ellington composition Daybreak Express (1933) provides one of the earliest
and most compelling examples of the intersection of spectral techniques and Afrological
forms of improvisation. Ellington’s densely-packed, three-minute work makes use of an
acoustic big band to recreate the sounds of a speeding train; in one of the piece’s most
remarkable passages, the brass and woodwind harmonies fuse together to imitate the wail
of a train whistle [Fig. 1]. Combining individual instrumental sounds to create a more
complex composite, Ellington’s writing in this portion of the piece clearly seems to
intend an instrumental synthesis. Though Daybreak Express was written at least forty
years before the emergence of the French spectral movement, Ellington’s use here of
orchestral synthesis to recreate real-world sounds certainly foreshadows many of the
fundamental concerns of composers like Murail and Grisey.4
More recently, the work of John Coltrane and Thelonious Monk has been theorized in
terms of the harmonic series, a central concept in early spectral pieces like Gérard
Grisey’s Partiels (1975). Music historian Bill Cole ([1976] 2001), for example, views
Coltrane’s improvised use of multiphonics and unorthodox fingerings, in compositions
like Om (1965), as a real-time manipulation of the harmonic spectrum of the saxophone.5
Pianist and composer Vijay Iyer (2010) has also argued that the harmonic series and the
physical properties of sound are at the heart of Thelonious Monk’s singular approach to
the piano.
Like Ellington, Charlie Parker is another Afrological improviser connected to the prehistory of spectral
music, in Parker’s case through his collegial ties to the expatriate French composer Edgar Varese. Varese
and Parker had arranged to work together and had it not been for Parker’s untimely passing in 1955, it
seems likely that he would have pursued formal studies with Varese (see Desmond, McClellan and Parker
(1954)).
5
Coltrane has also used saxophone multiphonics as a compositional premise. See Coltrane’s
“Harmonique” and his arrangement of the George Treadwell composition “I’ll Wait and Pray” as
documented on the 1960 recording Coltrane Jazz.
4
5
Fig. 1: Imitation of a train whistle in Duke Ellington’s Daybreak Express
For Iyer, Monk’s strategic use of chord voicings that span several octaves is directly
related to his intimate knowledge of the piano’s acoustic properties and overtone
structure. Monk’s then unorthodox use of chord extensions like the sharp four, the flat
nine, and the simultaneous use of the dominant and major sevenths, can, in fact, be
viewed as a means of approximating the upper partials of a fundamental frequency [Fig.
6
2]. In some ways, the spectral nature of Monk’s characteristic chord voicings and sound
clusters is reminiscent of Olivier Messiaen’s “chord of resonance,” in which targeted
Fig. 2: Chord voicings in relation to the overtone structure of an acoustic piano
7
piano voicings are used to approximate partials 4 through 15 of the harmonic series.6
However, as Anderson (2010) has pointed out, Messiaen’s “chord of resonance” is, in
fact, a middle-register compression of harmonics 4 through 15, in which the
approximation of a harmonic spectrum is contained within the span of two octaves. In
this sense, Monk’s highly resonant piano voicings may be more closely connected to the
proto-spectral harmonies employed by Henri Dutilleux in his orchestral work Métaboles
(1964), in which chords modeled off of the frequential structure of the harmonic series
span several octaves.7
Just as some improvisers have used spectral techniques, improvisation has played an
important, if little documented, role in the music of French spectral composers like
Murail, Grisey and Philippe Hurel. Grisey, in particular, made regular references in the
1980s to the influence of American jazz musicians on his concept of rhythm and fluid
pulse/periodicity (Grisey and Lelong 2008). Grisey taught at UC Berkeley from 1982 to
1986, and many of the major works he composed during and after this period – Talea
(1986), Le Noir de l‘Etoile (1990), and Vortex Temporum (1995) – bear witness to a new
preoccupation with musical rhythm. The influence of jazz and other forms of Afrological
improvisation is also deeply felt in the music of Philippe Hurel. Like Grisey, Hurel points
to jazz as a direct influence on his conception of the rhythmic, rather than the durational
aspects of musical time (Dénut and Hurel 2001). In chamber works like Six Miniatures en
Trompe l'Oeil (1991) and Kits (1995), Hurel calls upon the ensemble to perform complex
polyrhythms while remaining connected to the underlying pulse, which he considers to be
a rhythmic concept derived from contemporary forms of jazz.
It is also interesting to observe that, like many Afrological improvisers, French spectral
composers initially succeeded in gaining international recognition for their work through
their own efforts as composer/performers. Grisey and Murail co-founded Ensemble
l’Itineraire in 1973 with composers Hugues Dufourt, Roger Tessier and Michael Levinas
6
See Messiaen (1944) and Mittelstadt (2009) for a discussion of Messiaen’s use of the “chord of
resonance” in his piano writing in the compositions Poemes pour Mi (1936) and Quatuor pour la Fin du
Temps (1941), for example.
7
See Anderson (2010) for a comprehensive discussion of proto-spectral harmonies and formal organization
in Henri Dutilleux’s Métaboles (1964).
8
and regularly performed their own electro-acoustic8 works (Cohen-Levinas [1991] 1998).
Murail and Grisey would both eventually move away from such do-it-yourself
methodologies, towards compositional techniques reliant on cutting-edge technology and
generous institutional support.
In a letter written to composer Hugues Dufourt in 1980, Gérard Grisey expressed his
frustration with the term “spectral music,” finding it too vague and inclusive.9 Instead, he
proposed the term “liminal music” as a more apt description of the foundational concepts
in his work (Grisey and Lelong 2008). I would argue that this clarification may, in fact,
point to the most significant link between French spectral music and Afrological forms of
improvisation. Both of these musical traditions are built around thresholds of transition
and becoming, where the exploration of a liminal terrain between two fixed identities can
lead to a transcendent musical experience. Musical boundaries are central to spectral
music: the lines between harmony and timbre, pitch and noise, electronic and acoustic,
and rhythm and duration. In Afrological forms of improvisation, inquiry into such
musical boundaries is further reinforced by the traditional and fundamental nature of
improvisation as a creative practice situated at the thresholds of structure and disorder,
individuality and community, understanding and mystification, and the known and the
unknown.10
8
Tristan Murail has made several references to the improvisational nature of realizing and performing
works involving live electronics during the early 1970s (Murail 2010 and Cohen-Levinas [1991] 1998).
9
The term “spectral music” first appeared in Hugues Dufourt’s 1979 article “Musique Spectrale: Pour Une
Pratique des Formes de l’Énergie”, published in 1981.
10
See Ruud (1995), for example, for a discussion of jazz improvisation as a liminal experience, and its
application in a variety of music therapy techniques.
9
Rhythmic Thresholds and Music Perception Research
Je pressens cependant qu’il existe quelque part dans notre perception une limite,
un degré zéro en deça duquel il est impossible de trangresser sans sombrer dans
l’absurde. C’est de ce seuil que je parle; c’est a partir de ce seuil que devrait
s’organiser toute musique. (Gérard Grisey [1978] 1986)11
Beginning in the late 1970s, Gérard Grisey devoted more and more of his creative energy
to the compositional precept of rhythmic thresholds, placing particular emphasis on the
idea of fluid periodicity in works like Tempus Ex Machina (1979).12 In many of these
pieces, Grisey seeks to establish a kind of compositional homology between the harmonic
(harmonicity/inharmonicity) and durational (periodicity/aperiodicity) aspects of his
music. Later works, such as Vortex Temporum (1995), expand on these ideas and
demonstrate a unique set of rhythmic strategies which music theorist Jean-Luc Hervé
(2001) describes as “situated on the narrow crest where the rhythm falls neither into the
anesthetizing repetition of a simplistic pulsation, nor into a rhythmic complexity that
loses its way with all sensation of pulsation.”13 Composer/theorist Fred Lerdahl (1988)
has also commented on these types of rhythmic phenomena, noting that “constant change
doesn’t give rise to salient and distinctive transitions and neither does no change at all.
Babbitt and Reich have something in common after all.”
In the opening passage of Vortex Temporum, Grisey uses repetition, shifting rhythmic
periods, and an accelerating progression of registral changes to gradually transform his
musical material [Fig. 3]. The opening gesture of the piece, a rapidly repeating arpeggio,
evolves into a much longer musical action, where quick shifts in register mimic the shape
of the original arpeggio.14
11
“I sense, however, that somewhere in our perception there exists a limit, a degree zero, beneath which it
is impossible to pass without sinking into absurdity. It is of this threshold that I speak; it is beginning with
this threshold that all music should be organized.” Translation by the author.
12
See Chen (2010) for a detailed account of Tempus Ex Machina and its rhythmic structure.
13
“Situé sur l’étroite crete ou le rythme ne tombe ni dans la repetition anesthésiante d’une pulsation
simpliste, ni dans la complexité rythmique perdant pied avec toute sensation d’une pulsation.” Translation
by the author.
14
See Hervé (2001) for a comprehensive analysis of Vortex Temporum.
10
Fig. 3: Repetition and rhythmic shifts in Gérard Grisey’s Vortex Temporum
To a certain extent, the rhythmic structure of Vortex Temporum may be directly related to
a kind of “eureka” moment that Grisey experienced in 1984, while attending a rehearsal
of Tristan Murail’s Désintégration (1983):
Despite the extreme rigor of thought and the completely new treatment of sound
that Murail puts forth so abundantly, I am discovering to what extent it is time for
me to add rupture and rapidity to the obsession with continuity and slowness of
process. Is this the influence of African music, or of the jazz I discovered during
my stay in California? Is it the discovery of Conlon Nancarrow – the greatest
rhythmic composer since Stravinsky…? (Grisey [1984] 2008)15
Grisey’s reflections about his own compositional processes may indicate a desire to
anchor his use of rhythmic thresholds to a more comprehensive understanding of human
15
“Malgré l’extreme rigueur de la pensée et l’aspect a proprement parler inoui du traitement des sons que
Murail dispense a profusion, je decouvre a quel point il est temps pour moi d’ajouter rupture et rapidité a
l’obsession de la continuité et a la lenteur du processus. Est-ce l’influence de la musique africaine ou du
jazz découvert lors de mon séjour en Californie? Est-ce la découverte de Conlon Nancarrow – le plus grand
rythmicien depuis Stravinksy…?” Translation by the author.
11
perception. But in contrast to his work with harmony, which benefitted from considerable
familiarity with the science of psychoacoustics, any inquiry into the nature of rhythm
perception seems to have been based largely on intuition and personal experimentation.16
In my own efforts to move towards a more thorough understanding of the concept of
rhythmic thresholds present in French spectral music and Afrological forms of
improvisation, and to adapt these concepts to my own work, I have found a more
systematic review of the field of music perception to be useful, and here present a brief
overview of the relevant current research.
Cognitivist Research on Rhythmic Thresholds
In his article “Cognitive Constraints on Metric Systems: Some Observations and
Hypotheses,” music theorist Justin London (2002) provides a useful summary of the
rhythmic phenomena which have been studied in the field of music perception. Among
the categories of research listed by London, several relate directly to the concept of
rhythmic thresholds:
•
The range of spontaneous tempo: the longest and shortest periods in which we
are able to produce a steady beat
•
The values of preferred tempos: the rate at which we are most comfortable
producing a steady beat
•
Our sensitivity to changes of tempo at different initial rates and in different
contexts
•
Our sensitivity to differences of duration relative to the magnitude of the
durations involved
•
The shortest and longest durations musicians tend to produce in rhythmically
palpable patterns
•
The extent and limits of the psychological present
16
See Grisey (1987) and (1998) for additional examples of the composer’s written reflections on the
perception of musical rhythms. 12
Music perception studies on these topics suggest that there are perceptual and cognitive
limits on our ability to hear, understand, and reproduce musical rhythms. But as London
is careful to point out:
It is impossible to determine hard and fast values for the various temporal
thresholds…. Moreover, this research has shown that the various thresholds,
acuities, and so on are heavily dependent upon task, stimulus, context, and so
forth…. Thus with the understanding that proposed thresholds may be fuzzy, or
shift according to context, such thresholds nonetheless exist (London 2002).
In research focused on sensitivity to change in tempo and duration, perceptual thresholds
are usually referred to as the “just noticeable difference” or JND (normally represented as
percentage change). Much of the recent research dealing with cognitive constraints on
rhythm and tempo perception is predicated on the early work of Paul Fraisse, which
helped to establish a connection between rhythm and the structure of the body, and
posited several key categories of duration, including: (1) short durations: 400
milliseconds or shorter; (2) long durations: 600-2000 milliseconds; (3) the indifference
interval: 400-600 milliseconds, and (4) the perceptual present: 3-8 seconds (Fraisse 1963
and 1987). As music theorist Eric Clarke (1999) has noted, for Fraisse these categories of
duration “are not only quantitatively but also qualitatively different,” and it is now widely
accepted that the manner in which listeners process physical input is strongly affected by
these durational categories.
Tempo
Fraisse’s “indifference interval,” which he defines as the span of time for which a
listener’s estimate of duration is most accurate: 400-600 milliseconds (Fraise 1978),
seems to have a direct effect on the manner in which we perceive and entrain to various
tempi. Richard Parncutt (1994) has done research that suggests that listeners prefer to
hear tempos in the range of 100-120 BPM, or at an isochronous pulse rate of 500-600
milliseconds, which is well within the range of Fraisse’s indifference interval. Parncutt
also suggests a standard tempo range of 67-150 BPM, finding that listeners stop hearing
durations as regular pulses below 33 BPM (1800 seconds) and start grouping individual
13
pulses into larger units above 300 BPM (200 milliseconds). Parncutt’s proposed limits on
the perception of tempo (200-1800 milliseconds) can also be directly related to a
listener’s physical ability to reproduce isochronous durations. Bruno Repp (2005) has
cited 100 milliseconds as the shortest physically reproducible duration and 1800
milliseconds as the longest such duration. 1800 milliseconds (33 BPM) corresponds to
Parncutt’s lower limit of tempo perception and the duration of 100 milliseconds, is half
the value of Parcutt’s upper limit of 200 milliseconds.17 For many music theorists, the
very notion of tempo is contingent upon the ability to perceive symmetrical divisions of a
regular pulse, usually in ratios of 2:1 or 3:1. Given our apparent inability to reproduce,
and perceive regular sub-pulses shorter than 100 milliseconds, Parncutt’s upper limit of
tempo perception (200 milliseconds) can be viewed as a logical threshold.
The Psychological Present
The upper limits of tempo perception may also bear witness to another important
rhythmic threshold normally referred to as the “psychological present” or the “specious
present.” Michon (1978) defines the perceptual present as “the time interval in which
sensory information, internal processing, and concurrent behavior appear to be integrated
within the same span of attention.” Fraisse (1982) cites 2 to 3 seconds as an average
range for the psychological present, acknowledging that it can last as long as 5 seconds
depending on context. This roughly corresponds to 33 BPM as a lower limit on tempo
perception. Michon’s (1978) findings are similar, though he places the upper limit of the
psychological present at 7 to 8 seconds. Reflecting on the relationship between tempo
perception and the threshold of the psychological present, London suggests that:
If 2 seconds seems to be the limit for hearing successive events as temporally
connected outside of a metric hierarchy, then it makes sense that the absolute
value for a measure might be from about 4 to 6 seconds (i.e., twice or three times
the length of the “slowest possible beat” [sic]), (London 2002).
17
In assessing the longest physically reproducible duration, it is often difficult to determine when listeners
begin sub-dividing long durations into smaller groups in order to reproduce them more accurately (Repp
and Doggett 2007).
14
Building on this idea, it seems reasonable to conclude that the boundaries of the
psychological present correspond to a qualitative shift in our perception of rhythm and
musical time. For example, Francoise Maçar (1985 cited in Kramer 1988) has found that
listeners are much less sensitive to changes in duration for time spans lasting 4 seconds or
longer.
Just Noticeable Difference (JND)
The concept of “just noticeable difference” (JND) in music perception research can also
provide valuable insights into the nature of rhythmic thresholds. JNDs represent the
smallest amount of detectable difference between two sensory inputs. In the case of
rhythm perception, duration and tempo-rate (interonset interval) are the stimuli that are
most commonly studied. Dowling and Harwood (1986) cite a JND ranging from 2% to
3% for listeners tapping along to a steady beat and a JND between 5% and 10% for
(passive) listening estimations. In other words, a change in duration for a pulse lasting 1
second (1000 milliseconds) – a quarter note at 60 BPM, for example – might only be
detected once it reached the JND threshold of 900 milliseconds (10% decrease) or 1100
milliseconds (10% increase). As noted in the previous section, Maçar (1985 cited in
Kramer 1988) has found that the JND increases significantly for durations lasting 4 to 30
seconds, citing 16% as an average JND for those time-spans. With regard to sensitivity to
changes in tempo, Mark Ellis (1991) has found that the JND can vary considerably,
depending on tempo range. In particular, Ellis argues that it is harder to detect increase in
tempo at a range of 48-84 BPM and, likewise, slightly more difficult to detect decreases
in tempo at a range of 192-228BPM. His findings are summarized below:
Tempo Rate (BPM)
48
84
120
156
192
228
JND (Decrease in Tempo)
6%
6.5%
7%
7%
8%
7%
JND (Increase in Tempo)
13%
9%
7%
7%
6.0%
5.5%
15
Ecological and Categorical Perception
Traditional cognitivist approaches to rhythm perception provide a useful foundation for
the understanding of rhythmic thresholds. As previously suggested, the overview of
perceptual thresholds presented here is best understood as a collection of “fuzzy” data
that can vary, in significant ways, depending on the broader musical framework.
Nevertheless, many music theorists have criticized research in the field of music
psychology for relying too heavily on the analysis of abstracted and simplified musical
tasks that are taken out of context. Drawing on the work of psychologist James Gibson,
Eric Clarke is one music theorist who has proposed an ecological model of music
perception:
Rather than considering perception to be a constructive process, in which the
perceiver builds structure into an internal model of the world, the ecological
approach emphasizes the structure of the environment itself and regards
perception as the pick-up of that already structured perceptual
information….What is important is to consider what is directly specified [sic] by
environmental information – not what a perceiving organism can interpret in or
construct from, a stimulus. (Clarke 2005)
With regard to rhythm perception in particular, Clarke (1987) has suggested that it “can
be viewed as [the process of] finding solutions in a three-dimensional space” that
includes meter, beat sub-division, and expressive transformations. Building on this
conceptual premise, Clarke has argued for a categorical approach to rhythm perception in
which small whole number ratios of duration function as perceptual categories.18
According to Clarke, once the temporal information for rhythm has been perceptually
categorized into ratios of 1:1 or 2:1, for example, any duration that deviates from those
categories is considered to be either expressive or accidental. Placing emphasis on the
potential shift from one perceptual category to another – in place of the more traditional
notion of a JND – this view of rhythm perception has a direct effect on the concept of
rhythmic thresholds. In one experiment, listeners were presented with a short musical
sequence in a triple meter (6/8) and asked to identify targeted two-note phrases as
18
Fraisse helped to establish the foundational nature of whole number ratios in rhythm perception,
particularly 1:1 and 2:1, which he views as closely tied to the motor properties and the symmetrical
structure of the human body (Fraisse 1963).
16
belonging to either a 1:1 or 2:1 perceptual category. The total duration of the two-note
phrase remained constant at 960 milliseconds and the individual values of each note were
systematically varied between a ratio of 1:1 and 2:1, with several intermediate values. His
findings are summarized below (Clarke 1987):
Note Values (Milliseconds)
% of Listeners Identifying as 2:1 Ratio
640/320 (Perfect 2:1 Ratio)
560/400
540/420
480/480 (Perfect 1:1 Ratio)
100%
80%
50%
0%
As Clarke’s data indicates, in the context of a triple meter, half (50%) of the listener
continued to categorize the ratio of 540/420 milliseconds as 2:1. Compared to the perfect
2:1 ratio of 640/320, the 540/420 ratio represents a 15% change in the long value (640 to
540) and a 31% change in the short value (320 to 420), which is a far cry from a JND for
duration of 5-10%.
Like Clarke, Repp (1992) has also employed ecological models of rhythm perception in
his research. In a study on expressive timing, Repp suggested that a listener’s expectation
at key structural moments in a composition has a direct effect on his or her ability to
detect small changes in duration. Repp’s findings showed that if listeners expect to hear
an expressive ritard – at the end of an important musical phrase or section, for example –
they are much less likely to classify the music as slowing down. Thus, a temporary shift
in tempo, as implied by the structural context of a composition, can obscure the
perception of rhythmic change if it doesn’t represent a deviation from stylistic norms of
performance practice. As both Repp and Clarke’s research strongly suggests, it seems
likely that a thorough understanding of rhythmic thresholds must also account for the
methodological paradigm of ecological perception as it relates to compositional structure
and categorical boundaries.
17
Embodied Cognition
Drawing in part from research done by Fraisse, which suggests a close correlation
between the structure of the human body, motor functioning, and rhythm perception, Neil
Todd, Vijay Iyer, and others have proposed a model of rhythm perception grounded in
the concept of embodiment. Citing Varela, Iyer describes the paradigm of embodied
cognition in the following manner:
The viewpoint known as embodied or situated [sic] cognition treats cognition as
an activity that is structured by the body and its situatedness in its environment -that is, as embodied action. In this view, cognition depends upon experiences
based in having a body with sensorimotor capacities; these capacities are
embedded in an encompassing biological, psychological, and cultural context.
Sensory processes (perception) and motor processes (action), having evolved
together, are seen therefore as fundamentally inseparable, mutually informative,
and structured so as to ground our conceptual systems. (Varela 1991 in Iyer 1998)
Contributing to this methodological point of view, Todd (1994), for example, has
proposed a model of rhythm perception based around the idea of a sensory-motor filter,
where our ability to feel and recognize rhythms is defined by our motor capacities. Todd
cites 600 milliseconds as the center frequency for the sensory-motor filter, and the rate at
which it is easiest for listeners to perceive a regular tempo (100 BPM). Not surprisingly,
the rate of 600 milliseconds also corresponds to Fraisse’s “indifference interval” – the
span of time for which a listener’s estimate of duration is most accurate.
Expanding on Todd and Fraisse’s research in similar areas, Iyer (2002) has proposed a
table of rough musical correlates to bodily motion which is summarized here:
18
Body Motion
Approximate
Duration
Musical Correlate
Breathing, Body Sway
1 to 10
Seconds
Musical Phrase
Heartbeat, Walking,
Sexual Intercourse,
Head Nod
333 to 1000
Milliseconds
Musical Tempo
Speech, Lingual Motion,
Digital Motion
100 to 333
Milliseconds
Fast Notated
Rhythm, Smallest
Salient Subdivision
of Musical Pulse
With regard to rhythmic thresholds, Iyer’s table seems to suggest a categorical model of
rhythm perception in which different types of body movement help define perceptual
categories. And, as one might expect, the approximate boundaries separating breathing,
walking, and speaking in Iyer’s table correspond rather well to Fraisse’s categories of
duration.
Bodily Motion
Category (Iyer)
Approximate
Duration
Perceptual
Category (Fraisse)
Approximate
Duration
Breathing
1 to 10
Seconds
Psychological Present
2 to 8
Seconds
Walking
333 to 1000
Milliseconds
Indifference Interval
and Long Duration
400 to 2000
Milliseconds
Speaking
100 to 333
Milliseconds
Short Durations
100 to 400
Milliseconds
Given the wealth of music perception research pointing to the fundamental relationship
between rhythm and human movement19, it seems reasonable to conclude that a
comprehensive understanding of rhythmic thresholds must also account for thresholds of
embodiment as they have been defined in the field of embodied cognition.
19
See Clarke (1999) for a summary of current research on rhythm, timing, and movement in the field of
music perception.
19
Concluding Remarks on Rhythmic Thresholds
Reflecting on the nature of heuristics in music perception, Albert Bregman writes:
Having evolved in a world of [sound] mixtures, humans have developed heuristic
mechanisms capable of decomposing them. Because the conditions under which
decomposition must be done are extremely variable, no single method is
guaranteed to succeed. Therefore a number of heuristic criteria must be used to
decide how to group the acoustic evidence. These criteria are allowed to combine
their effects in a process very much like voting (Bregman [1990] 1994).
I propose that the music perception research discussed here be viewed not as the basis for
a theoretical model of rhythmic thresholds, but as a collection of heuristics that may
provide useful and meaningful approaches to rhythm in music composition. In my own
music, I have tried to draw from current research in the field of music perception, and
tend to believe, as Fred Lerdahl (1988) has stated, that “the music of the future will
emerge less from twentieth-century progressivist aesthetics than from newly acquired
knowledge of the structure of musical perception and cognition.” I also believe that
twenty-first century musical forms and other new modes of creativity will provide us
with crucial and unforeseen insight into the structure of the mind and how it processes
musical activity and information.
20
Echoes
My composition Echoes (2008), one of eight works comprising the cycle Travail,
Transformation and Flow, provides a useful example of the integration of spectral
techniques and rhythmic thresholds with Afrological forms of improvisation.
Commissioned by Chamber Music America in 2007, Echoes is written for an eight-piece
ensemble that includes trumpet, alto and tenor saxophones, tenor trombone, vibraphone,
tuba, acoustic bass, and drum set.
Formal Structure
Echoes is approximately five minutes long with a compositional form comprising three
sections: exposition (mm. 1-25), interlude (mm. 26-38), and drum coda (mm. 39-45). The
exposition (mm. 1-25) is played twice, with the alto saxophonist performing an
improvised solo during the second repetition. The interlude (mm. 26-38) is performed as
written and the drum coda (mm. 39-45) is repeated four times. During all four repetitions
of the drum coda, the drum set player performs an improvised solo.
Harmonic Structure
The harmonic language of Echoes is loosely based on the sound spectrum of a
vibraphone, which produces a very clear sense of pitch despite the presence of some
inharmonic partials, as well as a relatively loud 15th partial which sounds three octaves
and a major seventh above the fundamental.20 In the first measure of the piece, for
example, the written harmony is derived from the harmonic spectrum of the vibraphone
note E-1 (41.2 Hz): the tuba and the acoustic bass play the second harmonic (E – 82.4
Hz), the tenor saxophone sounds the seventh harmonic (C ¾ Sharp – 285.3 Hz), the alto
saxophone and the trombone play the ninth and tenth harmonic (respectively F# – 370 Hz
and G# – 415.3 Hz.), the trumpet sounds the eleventh harmonic (A ¼ Sharp – 452.9 Hz),
It is important to note that though the harmonic series and the overtone structure of acoustic pitched
instruments are often discussed in the context of spectral techniques, it is actually more common for
composers like Murail and Grisey to use inharmonic spectra as foundational elements in their music (see
Moscovich (1997) on Murail’s Gondwana (1980), for example).
20
21
and the vibraphone plays both the fifteenth and the thirty-second harmonic (D# – 622.3
HZ & E – 1318.5 Hz). The notated pitches in this measure are, of course, only
approximations of the exact frequential structure of the harmonic series. In a practice
commonly associated with spectral harmony, each note in the chord is rounded to the
nearest quartertone in an effort to keep the underlying frequency relationships intact [Fig.
4].
Fig. 4: Harmony and frequential structures in Echoes
22
The loud percussive attack of the vibraphone and the crash cymbal at the beginning of the
measure also contribute to the auditory sensation of spectral fusion. By masking the
individual attacks of the brass and woodwind instruments, the vibraphone and the crash
cymbal function somewhat like attack transients, creating a kind of composite ensemble
attack. As a result of these compositional techniques, the individual pitches in the chord
seem to fuse together, much like the harmonics of a single note on the vibraphone.
The harmonic rhythm of Echoes is fairly slow, with strategic shifts in orchestration and
metric structure, rather than frequent root movement, used to create compositional
change at the local level. The second measure of the piece, for example, is almost
identical to the first, except that the pitches originally played by the alto saxophone, tenor
saxophone, and tuba have been removed. The second measure is further transformed by
changes in dynamics and a metric shift from 6/4 to 5/4. By means of these somewhat
subtle shifts in color and texture, the second measure of the piece is meant to function as
a kind of reflection or echo of the first. Measures five and six share a similar relationship,
but here the written harmony is based on the harmonic spectrum of C-1 (32.7 Hz). The A
¼ Sharp (452.9 Hz) sounded by the trumpet in these measures is an approximation of the
fourteenth harmonic of C-1, whereas in measures one through four it had functioned as
the eleventh harmonic of E-1. This change in virtual fundamental functions as a kind of
common tone modulation, revolving around the hub of A ¼ Sharp [Fig. 5].
Rhythmic Structure
The rhythmic structure of Echoes is organized around groupings of four, five, six, seven,
and nine beats. Each grouping is subdivided into four parts of equal duration, accented to
varying degrees by the alto and tenor saxophones, trombone, tuba, acoustic bass, and
drum set.21 As a result of these phenomenal accents, each measure-length acquires a
distinctive polyrhythmic identity that remains unchanged throughout the entire piece. The
division of each measure into four equal parts also creates a very specific kind of
21
The 6/4 measures (mm. 1, 3, 6, 12, 15, 22, 26, 39) are actually divided into eight equal parts by the alto
saxophone, trombone and drum set. However, these measures can also be viewed as a continuous sequence
of two 3/4 measures divided into four equal parts.
23
rhythmic ambiguity with regard to pulse. Particularly in the measures of 5/4, it is possible
for a listener to entrain to groupings of five sixteenth notes and perceive them as a new,
slower tempo of 96 BPM.
Fig. 5: Common tone modulation in Echoes
24
In the measures of 7/4 and 9/4 this phenomenon is still present, though less prominent
due to the increased disparity between the notated quarter-note tempo of 120 BPM and
the tempi that emerge with the groupings of seven sixteenth notes (69 BPM) and nine
sixteenth notes (53 BPM). In the 6/4 measures of Echoes, for example, listeners and
performers often feel the groupings of three sixteenth notes as a new, faster tempo of 160
BPM – one that is easier to entrain to than the slower notated quarter-note tempo of 120
BPM. Peters and Schwarz (1989 cited in Summers and Rosenbaum 1993) have shown
that when asked to entrain to a simple polyrhythmic pulse comprised of two parallel
tempi, both musicians and non-musicians found it much easier to consistently execute the
faster of the two pulse-trains.
Handel (1984), however, has suggested that while listeners do tend to favor the faster of
two pulse-trains in the perception of polyrhythms, they also consistently gravitate
towards tempi that are physically easy and comfortable to execute. Given Parncutt’s
(1994) previously cited “preferred tempo range” of 100-120 BPM, it may follow that
polyrhythms comprised of two pulse-trains within the range of 100-120 BPM are most
likely to evoke the perception of a rhythmic threshold between two discrete tempi. In
Echoes, then, the measures of 5/4 may be most effective in provoking the sense of two
simultaneous tempi, precisely because the listener is presented with two pulse-trains that
fall roughly within Parncutt’s preferred tempo range: the quarter-note tempo (120 BPM)
and the tempo which emerges as a result of the four equal groupings of five sixteenthnotes (96 BPM).
Improvisation
The central framework for Afrological modes of improvisation in Echoes is provided by
its spectral chord changes. In measures one through four, for example, the alto
saxophonist is asked to improvise based on a musical scale comprised of harmonics eight
through sixteen of E1, rounded to the nearest quartertone. This chord-scale relationship is
marked in the score as “C# (H8-H16)” with the E transposed to C# for the alto saxophone
[Fig. 6]. In measure 5, when the harmony shifts to reflect the change in the virtual
fundamental from E1 to C1, the chord symbol notation also changes and is marked as “A
25
(H8-H16)”. As is the case with any system of chord changes, many of the decisions
regarding pitch choice and octave transposition are left to the improviser.
Fig. 6: Chord symbol notation for improvisation in Echoes
In my own experience, I’ve found that in negotiating the spectral chord changes of
Echoes I tend to emphasize harmonics nine, eleven, twelve, and fourteen in addition to
incorporating pitches derived from other scales when the musical context calls for it.
Each measure of music in Echoes is conceived of as a unique sound object: a composite
of harmony, rhythm and ensemble texture. As a result, the improvisational precept of
“changes” is expanded to include all three of these elements. In measures four and five,
for example, the alto saxophonist is expected to construct an improvisation informed by
(1) the metric shift from 5/4 to 7/4, (2) the change in texture brought about by the tenor
saxophone and the tuba, and (3) the modulation of the virtual fundamental from E1 to C1.
As a framework for Afrological improvisation, the compositional structure of Echoes can
be difficult to internalize. However, many of the challenges presented by the piece also
provide opportunities for creative approaches to improvisation. An improvised solo on
Echoes can be built around the microtonal pitch content of the spectral chord changes,
but it is also possible to imagine an improvisation that uses the piece’s rhythmic, textural,
and dynamic changes as its foundation. For example, the drum coda at the end of the
piece (mm. 39-45) can be seen as a platform for improvisation that privileges both
rhythmic and textural variation. In lieu of chord changes, the percussionist is asked to
negotiate a set of “dynamic changes,” which are the result of rapid shifts in the number of
26
accompanying players from seven (m. 39) to three (m. 40) to two (mm. 41-42) to five
(mm. 43-44) to one (m. 45) [Fig. 7].
Fig. 7: Dynamic changes in the drum coda in Echoes
27
Baltimore/Berlin
Written for a mixed quintet that includes Bb clarinet, trombone, piano, acoustic bass and
drum set, Baltimore/Berlin (2008, rev. 2011) is one of four compositions in the eveninglength cycle Impossible Flow, which was commissioned by the International
Contemporary Ensemble in 2010 and premiered on April 17, 2011 in New York City. In
the following analysis of Baltimore/Berlin, I present a brief overview of the
composition’s formal structure and harmonic underpinning before moving through a
more detailed and comprehensive account of the piece’s rhythmic structure, placing
special emphasis on the ways in which I have sought to incorporate rhythmic thresholds
into a work for a small chamber ensemble.
Formal Structure
In Baltimore/Berlin, expressive timing, compound meter, rubato phrasing, changing
tempi, polyrhythm, instrumental gesture, and memory are treated as a seamless
continuum designed to explore the psychology of musical time and its connection to
musical meaning. The piece is approximately eleven minutes long and comprises six
sections: first passacaglia (mm. 1-22 [3’]), first rhythmic interlude (mm. 23-39 [2’]),
piano interlude (mm. 40-48 [1’]), second rhythmic interlude (mm. 49-59 [1’]), rubato
interlude (mm. 60-81 [2’]), and second passacaglia (mm. 82-92 [2’]). Each section is
conceived of as a compositional “scene” which examines the rhythmic premise of
Baltimore/Berlin from a unique vantage point. As a result, the work demonstrates a kind
of kaleidoscopic formal logic, in which distinctive melodic motifs, instrumental gestures,
and chord voicing are presented to the listener in a variety of compositional contexts.
There are, however, several instances in Baltimore/Berlin in which compositional
material is transformed and developed in a more linear manner. The recapitulation of the
passacaglia in m. 82, for example, can be understood both as a more traditional formal
device and as a means of exploring the nature of long-term memory in the manifold of
rhythmic structures driving the piece.
28
Harmonic Structure
The harmonies in Baltimore/Berlin are derived from the physical properties of an
acoustic piano; the sound spectrum of the piano is slightly distorted, which results in
inharmonic overtones, starting with the 16th partial. The lowest octave of the piano is
also defined by the fact that, in many cases, the second harmonic has a higher amplitude
than the fundamental frequency. Throughout Baltimore/Berlin, the sound of the piano
and its physical structure provide a symbolic foundation for an array of harmonic devices.
In the opening measures of the piece, the natural resonance of the piano assumes a
harmonic role. In order to reinforce the acoustic properties and overtone structure of the
piano, the first passacaglia is written in the instrument’s lowest register, allowing a
greater number of the overtones to fall within the range of human hearing. The pianist is
also asked to keep the sustain pedal depressed throughout the entirety of the first section
in order to further reinforce and prolong the natural resonance of the piano’s upper
partials [Fig. 8].
Fig. 8: Opening passacaglia in Baltimore/Berlin
29
In mm. 14-15, the upper harmonics of the piano are reinforced by the clarinet and
trombone. The piano plays a D#1 (38.9 Hz), which functions as a fundamental frequency,
while the trombone sounds a rough approximation of the eleventh harmonic (A – 440 Hz)
and the clarinet plays the fourteenth harmonic (C ¼ Sharp – 538.6 Hz). The quiet noise of
the cymbal roll in mm. 14-15 and the mezzo-piano attack in the piano (with the damper
pedal removed) help to mask the entrance of the clarinet and trombone and allow those
instruments to fuse more easily with the natural resonance of the piano [Fig. 9].
Fig. 9: Approximation of upper piano harmonics by the clarinet and trombone in
Baltimore/Berlin
The harmonies in the second rhythmic interlude (mm. 49-59) are also modeled after the
slightly distorted spectrum of the piano. In the beginning of m. 49, for example, the
acoustic bass and the piano sound pitches derived from the overtones of a virtual
fundamental sounding at C-0 (16.4 Hz). The acoustic bass plays the second partial (C –
32.7 Hz) and the piano approximates the eleventh and fifteenth partials (F# – 185 Hz & B
– 247 Hz), as well as the 16 partial (C# – 277.1 Hz), which is slightly inharmonic.
30
Throughout the second rhythmic interlude (mm. 49-59), the harmonies are constructed in
this fashion and make frequent use of perfect fourth and perfect fifth intervals.
Demonstrating qualities of quartal harmony in a spectral context, the chords sounded by
the piano and acoustic bass in this section take on a distinctive character [Fig. 10].
Fig. 10: Mixtures of quartal harmony and spectral pitch organization in Baltimore/Berlin
Rhythmic Structure
The rhythmic structure of Baltimore/Berlin explores the concept of rhythmic thresholds
from multiple perspectives. Using a unique and meaningful approach to rhythm rooted in
the nature of human cognition, each section of the piece explores a specific facet of
rhythm perception.
In the first passacaglia (mm. 1-22), the notated tempo of eighth-note = 96/quarter-note =
48 places the temporal flow of the music at the lower threshold of Parncutt’s “normal
tempo range” (67 BPM) and at the tempo rate which both Parncutt (1994) and Repp and
31
Doggett (2007) have cited as the point at which listeners are unable to perceive/anticipate
a regular pulse (33 BPM). As a result, the opening section of Baltimore/Berlin
demonstrates a kind of “fuzzy periodicity,” even when the pianist is asked to play several
consecutive notes of equal length. The notated durational shifts in the opening
passacaglia also contribute to this phenomenon and further complicate the notion of pulse
salience in this section of the piece. Centering the first passacaglia around the quarternote value of 48 BPM and making frequent use of sixteenth-note groupings of 3, 5, and 6
to foster an asymmetrical pulse is intended to create a compositional tension between the
perception of discrete changes in duration and the human preference for and propensity to
hear temporal ratios of 1:1 (See Fraisse (1963) and Clarke (1987), among others) [Fig.
11].
Fig. 11: Fuzzy periodicity in the opening passacaglia of Baltimore/Berlin
The first rhythmic interlude (mm. 23-39) is largely defined by the introduction of the
drum set as a rhythmic instrument. The unison phrase played by the acoustic bass and
drum set at the end of m. 22 situates the opening passacaglia within a more explicit
32
rhythmic structure, introducing a fragmented and asymmetrical sense of pulse that
nevertheless remains highly synchronized. The material in this section of the composition
explores the extent to which rhythmic unisons and synchronized attacks can influence the
perception of musical pulse. Though the literature on this area of music cognition appears
to be virtually non-existent, I believe that this kind of inquiry is crucial to a
comprehensive understanding of rhythm perception. In Rai (2006), for example, I make
use of a seemingly random row of durations, which increasingly evokes the sense of an
underlying cognitive grid with notated unison attacks [Fig. 12].
Fig. 12: Unison attacks of asymmetrical rhythms in Rai
In Baltimore/Berlin, the meticulous alignment of musical materials is also reinforced by
the extensive use of the bass and snare drum. Though it may seem self-evident that
percussive timbres, in and of themselves, can contribute to a sense of pulse and rhythmic
33
stability, here again there is little psychological literature on the topic.22 In measure 31 of
Baltimore/Berlin, a rapidly shifting and highly asymmetrical organization of musical time
is made to sound more rhythmic as a result of unison attacks shared by the piano,
acoustic bass, and drum set, and densely notated material executed by the bass and snare
drum. As evidenced by the material in this measure, the first rhythmic interlude in
Baltimore/Berlin is intended to explore the relationship between timbre, alignment, and
the rhythmic threshold separating the perception of rhythm and pure duration [Fig. 13].
Fig. 13: Unison attacks in a rapidly shifting rhythmic context in Baltimore/Berlin
In the last four measures of the first rhythmic interlude (mm. 37-39), the listener is
presented with a rapidly shifting constellation of simultaneous pulse-trains. As Lerdahl
(1988) has noted, simultaneous tempos can compete for attention and obscure the
underlying rhythmic structure of a composition. Perkins and Howard (1976) have found
22
Writing on the nature of ecological perception in music, Vijay Iyer (2002) has noted that “we connect the
perception of musical motion at the ecological level to human motion.” From this point of view, the very
sound of a snare drum, for example, may evoke the feeling of a human action (the striking of a drum) that
culturally, we associate with rhythm.
34
that when presented with multiple tempos, listeners will attend to the rhythmic structure
in one way while remaining aware of alternate possibilities for entrainment, in some
cases moving back and forth between two or more options. In mm. 37-39 of
Baltimore/Berlin, the simultaneous presence of multiple pulse-trains is intended to create
a compositional tension between serial and segregated modes of listening [Fig. 13 and
14]. Jones and Jagacinski (1995) define serial listening as a mode of attending in which
two or more rhythmic textures are perceived as part of one sequential stream of
information. Segregated listening, or streaming, on the other hand, occurs when a
rhythmic sequence is perceived as two or more segregated streams.
Fig. 13: mm. 37-38 of Baltimore/Berlin
35
Fig. 14: m. 39 of Baltimore/Berlin
Bregman (1990) has suggested that periodic rhythms can reinforce the perception of an
auditory stream, and has also proposed that simultaneous pulse-trains separated by more
than 3 to 4 semitones encourage segregated modes of rhythmic attending (streaming). In
measure 39 of Baltimore/Berlin, the listener is presented with three separate isochronous
pulse-trains spanning several octaves: the clarinet plays a C ¾ Sharp, just above C4, in a
steady quarter-note pulse; the right hand of the piano sounds G#6 as quarter-note triplets,
and the left hand of the piano alternates between G2 and A#1 in groupings of five
sixteenth notes. Establishing multiple pulse-trains that compete for attention across a
wide registral span, I hope to evoke a perceptual threshold in the listener, simultaneously
encouraging segregated and serial modes of listening.
The rhythmic structure of the piano interlude (mm. 40-48) is oriented around the
boundaries of the psychological present. In mm. 39-40, the duration of the repeating
motif in the bass clef of the piano part is expanded from a regular pulse of five sixteenth
36
note groupings to a pulse of half notes and dotted half-notes. At the written tempo of
quarter-note = 48, groupings of five sixteenth-notes last approximately 1.5 seconds and
half notes and dotted half notes last about 2.5 seconds and 3.75 seconds respectively.
Given the average range of the perceptual present – 2 to 3 seconds, as defined by Fraisse
(1982) – the expansion of the piano motif in mm. 39-40 can be understood as a strategic
shift which places the musical material in a new perceptual framework. In measure 42,
the duration of the piano motif is expanded further to include a whole-note with a
duration of approximately 5 seconds – Fraisse’s upper limit for the psychological present.
Having reached a perceptual threshold in m. 42, the musical material in mm. 43-44 is
intended to create a symbolic link between the psychological present and a more
expanded notion of short-term memory. The repeated G#6 played by the piano in m. 43 is
an allusion to m. 39, where G#6 also figures prominently in the notated piano part. In
measure 44, the piano makes a veiled reference to the piece’s opening passacaglia, which
is expanded in mm. 45-46 [Fig. 15].
Fig. 15: Rhythmic structure in relation to the psychological present in Baltimore/Berlin
The second rhythmic interlude of Baltimore/Berlin (mm. 49-59) demonstrates the most
prominent and consistent sense of pulse, where the tactus is felt at approximately 96
37
BPM, at the eighth-note level. The notated drum set part in this section of the piece
establishes a semi-consistent temporal flow that is disrupted repeatedly at short intervals,
by the asymmetrical subdivision of the pulse. In this rhythmic context, compound meter
serves both to create segmentation and to prescribe a rough hierarchy of rhythmic
emphasis. Winold (1975) has suggested that the use of mixed meters, particularly those
that result in unequally timed beats, will bring about a strong sense of irregularity and
disruption in rhythmic structure. However, given the human preference for temporal
ratios of 1:1 and 2:1, a feeling of disruption at the phrase level can often be difficult to
achieve. Repp (1992), for example, has shown that listeners are often very good at
detecting small changes in duration at the pulse level, and much worse at the phrase level.
Repp has also suggested that this may, in part, be due to the fact that expressive
deviations in timing in Western Classical music tend to be lengthenings, as opposed to
shortenings, with the former often occurring at phrase boundaries. Following Repp, the
strategic use of compound meter to shorten individual pulses in the second rhythmic
interlude of Baltimore/Berlin can be understood as a means of provoking at the phrase
level a sense of rhythmic unbalance that is more likely to be perceptually salient. This
compositional effect is reinforced by the fact that shortened pulses in this section of the
piece are systematically followed by unison attacks in the piano, acoustic bass, and drum
set, which mark important phrase boundaries. The manipulation of rhythm to postpone
and anticipate listener expectation has long been understood as a kind of phenomenal
accent in music.23 Indeed, the rhythmic structure of Baltimore/Berlin in mm. 49-59 is
intended to create a heightened sense of compositional tension by simultaneously
manipulating expectation at both the beat and the phrase levels. Structuring my rhythmic
materials in this way, I hope to achieve a careful compositional balance where the
impression of a steady pulse is constantly deconstructed and transformed, without being
completely obscured [Fig. 16].
In stark contrast to the second rhythmic interlude, the rhythmic structure in the rubato
interlude (mm. 60-81) is intended to promote a sense of what Pierre Boulez (1960) has
referred to as “smooth time,” where the listener is unable to perceive the presence of a
musical pulse.
23
See Cooper and Meyer (1956), for example, on rhythmic postponement.
38
Fig. 16: Mixed meter and rhythmic disruption in Baltimore/Berlin
This effect is achieved through the use of musical gestures which do not demonstrate a
discrete beginning or end, and are thus more difficult to situate within a rhythmic context:
piano tremolos with the sustain pedal depressed; quiet glissandi in the trombone and
acoustic bass, and cymbals rolls in the notated drum part. Here again, the distinctive
repetition of G#6 in the upper register of the piano is intended to reference mm. 39 and
43 where the G#6 is first introduced. In this context, the G#6 can be viewed as a
symbolic compositional gesture, evoking the role of long-term memory in the rhythmic
framework of the piece. In measure 65, the notated tremolo in the lower register of the
piano is transformed into a more rhythmic gesture, which suggests a distinct feeling of
pulse that remains largely obscured as a result of the notated register and the consistent
use of the sustain pedal [Fig. 17].
39
Fig. 17: mm. 62-66 of Baltimore/Berlin
40
Conclusion
When I first encountered the music of Tristan Murail and Gérard Grisey in 2001, I was
profoundly moved by the unique, otherworldly nature of their harmonic language, and I
began to think about ways to integrate spectral harmony into my work as an improviser.
Eleven years after my initial introduction to Murail and Grisey’s music, I am still
exploring the relationship between spectral music and Afrological improvisation and
continuing to make new connections and new musical discoveries.
Initially, my synthesis of spectral harmony, Afrological improvisation, and highly
structured rhythmic materials was essentially intuitive and guided by a rough set of
aesthetic precepts. In the process of working towards a more comprehensive
understanding of these musical practices, however, I have been able to construct a rich
conceptual framework for my work as a composer/performer. In particular, by focusing
on the dual concepts of liminality and perceptual thresholds as they relate to the
harmonic, rhythmic, formal, and improvisational aspects of my music, I hope I have been
able to further reinforce some of the important correspondences between the distinct
musical traditions informing my work. My exploration of the music cognition literature
and, my investigations of its application to my own music, has been one means towards
this end.
In both improvised and fully notated formats, my compositions reflect and extend
Afrological notions of collaboration and a heterogeneous sound ideal that is capable of
sustaining alternative value systems and diverse musical perspectives. Both Echoes and
Baltimore/Berlin are compositions that can pose new challenges for performers because
of their highly collaborative nature. The first performances of Baltimore/Berlin, for
example, were realized with a carefully selected group of musicians, who were intimately
familiar with my previous music and my highly personal repertoire of rhythmic devices,
and were thus capable of contributing to the piece in meaningful ways. In my future
research, I hope to explore the ways in which the concept of liminality can be extended to
the nature of composer-performer interaction, resulting in a collaborative model that is at
once hierarchical and non-hierarchical.
41
The act of composing music of meaning and substance continues to be a mysterious
process for me in many ways. My hope is that this paper will contextualize some of the
key ideas that have contributed to my recent music and encourage others to extend my
research and experimentation in these areas.
42
Works Cited
Anderson, Julian. “A Provisional History of Spectral Music.” In Contemporary Music
Review, vol. 19, no. 2, 2000.
Anderson, Julian. “Timbres, Process and Accords Fixes: Dutilleux and his Younger
French Contemporaries.” In Contemporary Music Review, vol. 29, no. 5, 2010.
Boulez, Pierre. “Time, Notation and Coding.” In Pierre Boulez and Jean-Jacques Nattiez,
eds. Orientations: Collected Writings (London: Faber and Faber, [1960], 1990).
Bregman, Albert. Auditory Scene Analysis: The Perceptual Organization of Sound
(Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, [1990], 1994).
Chen, Huey-Meei. Temporality and Process in the Compositions of Gérard Grisey.
Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, New York City, 2010.
Clarke, Eric. “Categorical Rhythm Perception: An Ecological Perspective.” In A.
Gabrielsson, ed. Action and Perception in Rhythm and Music (Stockholm: Royal
Swedish Academy of Music, 1987).
Clarke, Eric. Ways of Listening: An Ecological Approach to the Perception of Musical
Meaning (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005).
Clarke, Eric. “Rhythm and Timing in Music.” In D. Deutsch, ed. The Psychology of
Music (New York: Academic Press, [1982], 1999).
Cohen-Lévinas, Danielle. Vingt-Cinq Ans de Création Musicale Contemporaine (Paris:
L’Harmattan, [1991], 1998).
Cole, Bill. John Coltrane (New York: Da Capo, [1976], 2001).
Coltrane, John. Coltrane Jazz. Atlantic Records 1354-2, 1960. Compact disc.
.
Cooper, G. W. and L. B. Meyer. The Rhythmic Structure of Music (Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, [1960], 1976).
Dénut, Eric and Philippe Hurel. “Une Musique Résistante.” In Eric Dénut, ed. Musiques
Actuelles, Musiques Savantes: Quelles Interactions? (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2001).
Desmond, Paul, John McLellan and Charlie Parker. Interview with Charlie Parker
(Boston: WHDH Radio, January 1954).
Dodge, Charles and Thomas Jerse. Computer Music: Synthesis, Composition, and
Performance (New York: Schirmer Books, 1997)
Dowling, J. and Harwood, D. Music Cognition (Orlando: Academic Press, 1986).
43
Drott, Eric. “Spectralism, Politics and the Post-Industrial Imagination.” In Bjorn Helle,
ed. The Modernist Legacy: Essays on New Music (Farnham, England &
Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate, 2009).
Ellis, Mark. “Thresholds for Detecting Tempo Change.” In Psychology of Music, vol. 19,
1991.
Grisey, Gérard. “Avec L’Itineraire.” In Guy Lelong, ed. Écrits: Ou L’Invention de la
Musique Spectrale (Paris: Éditions MF, 2008).
Grisey, Gérard. “Vous Avez Dit Spectral?” In Guy Lelong, ed. Écrits: Ou L’Invention de
la Musique Spectrale (Paris: Éditions MF, [1998], 2008).
Grisey, Gérard. “Tempus ex Machina: A Composer’s reflections on musical time.” In
Contemporary Music Review, vol. 2, 1987.
Grisey, Gérard, and Guy Lelong. Écrits: Ou L’Invention de la Musique Spectrale (Paris:
Éditions MF, 2008).
Fineberg, Joshua. “Guide to the Basic Concepts and Techniques of Spectral Music.” In
Contemporary Music Review, vol. 19, no. 2, 2000.
Floyd, Samuel A. The Power of Black Music: Interpreting Its History from Africa to the
United States (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995).
Fraisse, Paul. The Psychology of Time (New York: Harper & Row, 1963).
Fraisse, Paul. “Time and Rhythm Perception.” In E. C. Carterette & M. P. Friedman, eds.
Handbook of Perception (New York: Academic Press, 1978).
Fraisse, Paul. “Rhythm and Tempo.” In D. Deutsch, ed. The Psychology of Music (New
York: Academic Press, 1982).
Fraisse, Paul. “A Historical Approach to Rhythm as Perception.” In A. Gabrielsson, ed.
Action and Perception in Rhythm and Music (Stockholm: Royal Swedish
Academy of Music, 1987).
Handel, Stephen. “Using Polyrhythms to Study Rhythm.” In Music Perception, vol. 1,
no. 4, 1984.
Herve, Jean-Luc. Dans Le Vertige De La Durée (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2001).
Iyer, Vijay. Microstructures of Feel, Macrostructures of Sound: Embodied Cognition in
West African and African-American Musics. Ph.D. dissertation, University of
California, Berkeley, 1998.
Iyer, Vijay. “Embodied Mind, Situated Cognition and Expressive Microtiming in
African-American Music.” In Music Perception, vol. 19, no. 3, 2002.
44
Iyer, Vijay. “Thelonious Monk: Ode to a Sphere.” In JazzTimes, January/February 2010.
Jones, M. R., Jagacinski, R. J., and Yee, W. “Tests of Attentional Flexibility in Listening
to Polyrhythmic Patterns.” In Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Perception and Performance, vol. 21, no. 2, 1995.
Kramer, Jonathan. The Time of Music (New York: Schirmer Books, 1988).
Lehman, Stephen. “I Love You With An Asterisk: African-American Experimental
Music and the French Jazz Press, 1970-1980.” In Critical Studies in
Improvisation, vol. 1, no. 2, 2005.
Lehman, Stephen. “McLean’s Scene: Jackie McLean as Improviser, Educator and
Activist.” In Critical Studies in Improvisation, vol. 3, no. 2, 2008.
Lerdahl, Fred. “Congitive Constraints on Compositional Systems.” In John A. Sloboda,
ed. Generative Processes in Music: The Psychology of Performance,
Improvisation, and Composition (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988).
Lewis, George. “Improvised Music After 1950: Afrological and Eurological
Perspectives.” In Black Music Research Journal, vol. 16, no. 1, Spring 1996.
London, Justin. “Cognitive Constraints on Metric Systems.” In Music Perception, vol.
19, no. 4, 2002.
Maçar, Françoise. “Time Psychophysics and Related Models.” In J.A. Michon and J. L.
Jackson, eds. Time, Mind and Behavior (Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1985).
Messiaen, Olivier. Technique de mon Langage Musical (Paris: Alphonse Leduc, [1944],
1999).
Michon, J.A. “The Making of the Present: A Tutorial Review.” In J. Requin, ed.
Attention and Performance VII (Hilsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1978).
Mittelstadt, James. “Resonance: Unifying Factor in Messiaen’s Accords Spéciaux.” In
Journal of Musicological Research, vol. 28, 2009.
Moscovich, Viviana. “French Spectral Music: An Introduction.” In Tempo, no. 200,
1997.
Murail, Tristan. Personal communication. April 30, 2010.
Murail, Tristan. “After-thoughts.” In Contemporary Music Review, vol. 19 no. 3, 2000.
Parncutt, Richard. “Perceptual Models of Pulse Salience and Metrical Accent in Musical
Rhythms.” In Music Perception, vol. 11, no. 4, 1994.
45
Perkins, D. N. and Howard, V. A. “Toward a Notation for Rhythm Perception.” In
Interface, vol. 5, no. 1-2, 1976.
Peters, M. and Swartz, S. “Coordination of the Two Hands and Effects of Attentional
Manipulation in the Production of a Bimanual 2:3 Polyrhythm. In Australian
Journal of Psychology, vol. 41, 1989.
Repp, Bruno. 1992. “Probing the Cognitive Representation of Musical Time: Structural
Constraints on the Perception of Timing Perturbations.” In Cognition, vol. 44,
1992.
Repp, Bruno. “Sensorimotor Synchronization: A Review of the Tapping Literature.” In
Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, vol. 12, 2005.
Repp, B. and Doggett, R. “Tapping to a Very Slow Beat: A Comparison of Musicians
and Nonmusicians.” In Music Perception, vol. 24, no. 4, 2007.
Rose, François. “Introduction to the Pitch Organization of French Spectral Music.” In
Perspectives of New Music, vol. 34, no. 2, 1996.
Ruud, Evan. 1995. “Improvisation as a Liminal Experience: Jazz and Music Therapy as
Modern Rites of Passage.” In Carolyn Bereznak Kenny, ed. Listening, Playing,
Creating: Essays on the Power of Sound (Albany: State University of New York
Press, 1995).
Summers, J., Rosenbaum, D., Burns, B., and Ford, S. “Production of Polyrhtyhms.” In
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, vol.
19, no. 2, 1993.
Todd, N. P. and Lee, C. S. “An Audiotry-Motor Model of Beat Induction.” In
Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference )Aarhus, Denmark:
International Computer Music Association, 1994).
Varela, F., Thompson, E., and Rosch, E. The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and
Human Experience (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1991).
Wilson, Olly. “The Significance of the Relationship between Afro-American Music and
West African Music.” In The Black Perspective in Music, vol. 2, no.1, 1974.
Winold. Allen. “Rhythm in Twentieth-Century Music.” In Gary E. Wittlich, ed. Aspects
of Twentieth-Century Music (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1975).
46
ECHOES
For Mixed Octet
Steve Lehman (2008)
47
Performance Notes
Bb Trumpet
Alto Saxophone
Tenor Saxophone
Tenor Trombone
Vibraphone
Tuba
Double Bass
Drum Set (Kick Drum, Snare, Hi-Hat, Crash Cymbal, Ride Cymbal)
General:
Accidentals apply only to the note-heads which they precede and do not carry through the measure.
The one exception to this rule applies to consecutive articulations of the same pitch in which case only
one accidental is used for all sequences of two or more
identical pitches.
Quarter-tone, Half-tone, and Three-Quarter-Tone Accidentals are notated in the
following manner:
1/4
Tone
Sharp
1/2
Tone
Sharp
3/4
Tone
Sharp
Percussion/Drum Set:
1
2
3
4
5
6
Kick/Bass
Drum (1)
Cross Stick
(Snare) (2)
7
8
9
Crash
Cymbal (7)
Closed
Hi-Hat (6)
48
Ride
Cymbal (8)
q
»¡™º
& 46 .. µ w .
F
Trumpet in B b
6 # >œ .
& 4 ..
F
.
& 46 .. ˙
F
# >œ .
? 46 ..
f
w
& 46 .. # w
f
Echoes
C# (H8-H16)
Alto Sax.
Tenor Sax.
Trombone
Vibraphone
? 46 ..
Tuba
œ œ
œ œ
Drum Set
A. Sx.
>œ .
œ
œ œ
œ
œ œ.
œ œ.
y
œ
x x œ
& 46 Â ˙
3
Tbn.
3
Vib.
3
Tuba
3
A.B.
3
? 46
œ œ
œ
.
# >œ .
œ œ
œ
œ œ.
œ œ.
>œ .
˙.
>œ .
f
w
6
#
&4 w
f
y y y
x x
œ
y
œ x
œ
6
ã 4
f
y
œ œ
œ œ
œ
œ
œ œ.
œ œ.
œ
œ
y
x x œ
46
#œ
45 ˙
P
y
45 œ
œ œ.
œ
œ
œ
x œ
.
œ
œ
œ x
49
y
œ
46
46
˙
y
x
y
y y.
œ x x x.
œ

œ œ.
œ
œ
F
œ.
74
74
œ œ
74
P
œ
œ
74
7
4

œ
x œ
.
œ
œ
y
46
74
œ
5
4
y y y
x x
46
46
œ
45
45 ˙
P
5 y
4 œ
œ œ


#œ
œ.
F
œ
œ
45
p
w>
54 # w
P
˙.
y y
x œ x x

45
˙.
? 46 ˙ .
45
45 µ w

œ
œ
?6
4 ˙.
6
4
45
˙.
œ

p
w>
54 # w
P
˙.
46
œ
5
4
45
3
T. Sx.
D. S.
˙.
œ œ
Motor: Medium Speed
˙.
f
& 46 µ w .
F
3
>.
& 46 # œ
>œ .
œ
œ
f
B b Tpt.
œ œ.
œ
? 46 .. ˙ .
f
y
y y
x œ x x
ã 46 ..
Acoustic Bass
œ œ.
œ
45 µ w

74
˙
x
y
y y.
œ x x x.
œ
7
4
B b Tpt.
5
5
A. Sx.
T. Sx.
5
Tbn.
5
Vib.
5
Tuba
D. S.
B b Tpt.
œ
A (H8-H16)
& 74 œ
œ. œ œ œ œ œ
7 #˙.
&4
œ œ ˙.
œ
œ. œ œ œ œ œ
f
w
& 74 w
f
œ
œ
˙.
œ œ ˙.
?7
4
? 74
9
? 74 ˙ .
&µ w
œ
& œ œ œ. œ œ œ. œ œ
T. Sx.
&˙
9
Tbn.
9
Vib.
9
Tuba
46

6
4

6
4
74 µ w .
F
œ
>œ . œ œ œ œ œ . >œ . œ œ œ œ œ .
p
w>
46 w
P
F
œ
œ
46

46 ˙ .
˙.
?
œœ ˙
œ œ œ. œ œ œ. œ œ
w
&w
f
?
˙
œ
œ
œœ ˙
49 µ w
p
O
49
49
49
˙
p
w.
9 w.
4
f
49
Œ
œ
Œ
Œ Œ

œ œ. œ

œœ œ
œ. œ ˙
˙.
˙.
P

?˙
9
œœ ˙
œœ w
4 w
f
P
9
y y y y.
y y yy y y y
y x
yy y y y xx
ã œ œ . œ x œ x x x . œ 49 x œ x x œ x œ x x œ x œ x œ x
œ
9
D. S.
œ œ. œ
œ œ ˙.
A. Sx.
9
A.B.
œ œ. œ
46 µ w

œ
74 œ
œ. œ œ œ œ œ
7 #˙.
4
œ œ ˙.
œ
œ. œ œ œ œ œ
f
w
74 w
f
œ
œ
˙.
œ œ ˙.
7
4
74
74 ˙ .
œ œ. œ
œ œ. œ
45 µ w
œ
45 œ œ œ . œ œ œ . œ œ
5
4 ˙
5
4
œœ ˙
œ œ œ. œ œ œ. œ œ
w
45 w
f
45
œ
œ
˙
œœ ˙
œœ ˙
45 ˙
f
5
y y y y y.
y y y y yy .. y y y y
y
y y y y y.
y y y y yy .. y y
y y y y.
yy y
y
ã 74 x œ x œ œ œ . x x œ x œ x œ . x x 46 x œ x x œ œ x x œ x x œ œ x œ 74 x œ x œ œ œ . x x œ x œ x œ . x x 45 œ x œ . œ x œ x x x . œ
5
A.B.
& 74 µ w .
74 µ w .
F
œ œ ˙.
œ
74 œ
œ. œ œ œ œ œ
74 # ˙ .
œ œ ˙.
œ
œ. œ œ œ œ œ
f
w
7 w
4
f
œ
œ
˙.
œ œ ˙.
74
74
7 ˙.
4
74
y
œ œ ˙.
œ œ. œ
œ œ. œ
46 µ w

˙
46

46

46
F
>œ . œ œ œ œ œ . >œ . œ œ œ œ œ .
p
w>
6 w
4
P
œ
œ
46

6
4 ˙.
˙.
P
y y.
y y y y yy .. y y y y
y
x yx y
xx
x x
x x 46 x x x
x x y yx yx
xy
œ œ œ œ. œ
œ œ.
œ
œ œ
œ
œ œ œ
50
B b Tpt.
& µw.
F
13
>.
. >.
.
& #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
F
13
A. Sx.
T. Sx.
Tbn.
Vib.
C#. (H8-H16)˙ .
&Â ˙
F
# >œ . œ œ œ œ œ . >œ . œ œ œ œ œ .
13
?
f
w
13
& #w
?
13
Tuba
D. S.
B b Tpt.
f
˙.
f
T. Sx.
Tbn.
17
& µw
F
œ
& œ œ œ. œ œ œ. œ œ
F
œœ ˙
& ˙
F
œ œ œ. œ œ œ. œ œ
17
?
f
w
& #w
?
A.B.
D. S.
p
w.
94 w .
f
œ œ. œ

œœ œ
œ. œ ˙
˙.
˙.
P
œ
œ
f
74 µ w .
F
74 # œ
F
œ
B (H8-H16)
74 ˙ .
F
#œ
74
F
w.
74 # w .
f
œ œ ˙.
œ. œ œ œ œ œ
O
46

46

46
œ œ. œ
œ œ. œ
œ
œ
45 µ w
p
p
w.
64 w .
f
F
˙.
46 ˙ .
P
y y y
y
yy y
y
46 x œ x x œ œ x x œ x x œ œ x œ
œ
45

#œ œ œ. œ œ œ. œ œ
˙
f
œœ ˙
7
4
F
œ
œ
51
74 µ w .
p
œ
45 œ œ œ . œ œ œ . œ œ
F
54 ˙
œœ ˙
F
œ œ œ. œ œ œ. œ œ
45
f
w
œ
œ
45 w
f
45


p
w
54 # w
45 µ w
F
Œ
>œ . œ œ œ œ œ . >œ . œ œ œ œ œ .
45
45
Œ
œ
46

œ. œ œ œ œ œ
46 µ ˙ .
p
5

4
˙.
œ œ ˙.
f
17
? ˙
7 ˙.
5
œœ ˙
œ œ ˙.
œœ ˙
4
4 ˙
f
f
P
17
y y y y.
y y y y y.
y y y y yy .. y
y y y y.
y
y
7
5
ã œ x œ. œ x œ x x x. œ 4 x œ x œ œ œ. x x œ x œ x œ. x x 4 œ x œ. œ x œ x x x. œ
17
Tuba

A (H8-H16)
˙
Œ Œ
œœ w
49 w
P
f
13
y y y
y
y y yy y y y
yy y
y
yy y y y
ã x œ x x œ œ x x œ x x œ œ x œ 49 x œ x x œ x œ x x œ x œ x œ x
œ xx
17
Vib.
49
Œ
˙.
17
A. Sx.
O
49
49
Œ
œ
49
˙.
? ˙.
13
A.B.
œ
œ
49 µ w
p
˙
f
œœ ˙
œœ ˙
45 ˙
f
y y y y.
y
45 œ x œ . œ x œ x x x . œ
œ
49
74

49
74

49
74
#œ
p
w.
74 # w .
F
7
4
œ. œ œ œ œ œ

œ œ. œ
F
œ
œ
49
49
9
4
7 ˙.
9
œ œ ˙.
4
4
P
y
y y.
y y y y yy .. y
74 x y x y
9
œ œ œ œ. x x œ x œ x œ. x x 4
& 49

A. Sx.
& 49

T. Sx.
& 49

? 49

B b Tpt.
21
21
21
Tbn.
w
9
#
&4 w
P
? 49
? 49 ˙
21
A.B.
f
y
y
xœx
ã 49
21
D. S.
B b Tpt.
A. Sx.
T. Sx.
Tbn.
Vib.
& 74 µ w .
F
24
>
& 74 # œ
F
œ œ.
œ
œ œ œ
œ œ œ œ œ . >œ .
œ. œ ˙
yy y y y
yy y y
xœ xœ x x œ xœ xœ x
˙.
œ œ œ œ œ . >œ .
˙.
˙.
f
˙.
46 ˙ .
f
y
y
y
y y
yy y
y
6
œ xx 4 xœx x œ œ xxœ x x œ œ x œ
7
& 4 ˙.
F
# >œ
24
?7
4
F
w.
24
& 74 # w .
f
?7
4
œ.
>œ œ
œ
>œ
œ
œ
œ
˙.
œ
>œ
œ >œ .
œ
œ >œ .
œ
œ
A.B.
D. S.
˙.
f
24
? 74 ˙ .
f
24
y
y
y y y.
7
x œ
x œ
ã 4
œ œ.
œ
œ
œ
x x œ
y

74
45

74
45

74
45
˙.

y
y y yy ..
œ x
œ.
x
52
y
x
45 ˙
P
5 yy
4 œ
74
œ
œ >œ .
œ
œ
F
œ.
>œ œ
P
œ
œ
x œ
.
œ
œ
y
74
74
.. 46
.. 46
.. 46
.. 46
.. 46
.. 46

œ
74
45 œ œ œ . œ œ œ . œ œ
P
y.
y y yy y .
yy
45 œ x œ . œ x œ x x x . œ
5
4
# >œ
œ
œ

5
4
˙.
x
45

p
w
45 # w
œ
œ
œ
74
45
5
4
24
Tuba

45 µ w
p
œ
œ.
œ œ œ œ œ.
45
w
54 # w
24
>œ œ
œ œ œ œ œ.
46

21
Tuba
46 ˙ .
F
# >œ .
46
f
w.
46 # w .
f
œ œ w
œ œ w
21
Vib.
46 µ w .
F
>
46 # œ .
F
.. 46
˙
x
y
y y.
œ x x x.
6
œ .. 4
B b Tpt.
A. Sx.
T. Sx.
Tbn.
& 46 µ w .
F
26
>.
& 46 # œ
F
.
& 46 Â ˙
F
# >œ .
26
? 46
74
26
œ œ œ œ œ.
œ œ œ œ œ.
>œ .
œ œ œ œ œ.
˙.
>œ .
œ œ œ œ œ.
f
w
& 46 # w
f
Vib.
? 46
D. S.
B b Tpt.
˙.
? 46 ˙ .
T. Sx.
7
& 4 Âœ œ
œ œ œ. .
29
& 74
Œ
& 74 # œ
P
? 74
& 74 œ
?7
4
29
Tuba
œ.
#œ
µœ œ
°
œ #œ ˙
Œ
f
œ
œ
œ.
45

74  œ œ .
œ #œ
45

74
45

74 Œ
5
4

ã 74
y
œ
œ
x œ
y
xœ
œ œ
x
7
4
œ
#œ
œ #œ.
œ µœ. œ
F
˙
œ
œ
y
y y y.
œ œ. x x œ
#w
45 w
œ
œ
5
4 #œ œ œ. œ œ œ. œ œ
P
y.
y y yy y
y y y yy ..
y 5 yy
x œ x œ x x 4 œ x œ œ x œ x x x .. œ
.
.
œ
œ œ. œ
53
44 # w
74
44
74
#˙

44 # ˙
y
x
74
˙
74
˙
f
y
y y.
y 7
44
œ xx œx
œœx x 4

œ  œœ œ . œ Â˙
˙

#w.
74 w .
Œ
#œ. iœ ˙
i œ œ. œ
œ
œ
7
4

7 #œ
4
74
74

44
œ
74

#w
44 w
# ww



? 7 #œ
4
29
D. S.
Œ
74
44
# œ µ œ >œ >œ
œ i œ. ˙
5
4

29
A.B.

74 Œ

29
Vib.
74
‰ Âœ œ œ œ œ Ó
P
29
Tbn.
œ #œ
œ Âœ œ
 œ #œ
˙.
29
A. Sx.
œ Â˙
R
74 œ
œ. œ œ
œ œ œ
œ œ.
f
P
26
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y y y.
y y y yy .
x œ x œ.
ã 46 x œ x x œ œ x x œ x x œ œ x œ 74 x œ x œ œ œ . x x œ
.
26
A.B.
˙.
f
‰.
74
26
Tuba
74 Œ
w.
74 # w .
F
œ
œ
26
44 Â w

y
œ.
œ œ
œ œ œ
œ œ. œ
y y y y yy .
y y y y.
y
x œ x œ œ œ x x œ x œ x œ. x x
.
.
B b Tpt.
A. Sx.
T. Sx.
&µ w.
F
32
>œ
&
&
?
32
Tbn.
32
Vib.
&
?
32
Tuba
œ . >œ œ œ >œ œ
µ ˙.
D. S.
B b Tpt.
F
>œ
œ . >œ œ œ >œ œ
T. Sx.
˙.
œ. œ œ œ œ œ
?œ
œ œ. œ
49 ˙
f
32
y y y y y.
y y y y yy .. y 9 y
ã x œ x œ œ œ. x x œ x œ x œ. x x 4
& 74  œ œ
œ œ œ. .
36
& 74
Œ
& 74 # œ
P
? 74
œ.
µœ œ
& 74 œ
?7
4
36
Tuba
#œ
°
? 7 #œ
4
ã 74
36
D. S.
y
xœ x
œ.
y
xœ
y
œ . µœ ˙
œ
F

œ œ
œ #œ
œ.
yy y y y
x œ xœ x x œ
44 Â w
45

44
45

44 # w
45

44
w
54 w
œ ˙
45

œœ

œ. œ ˙
œ
45 # œ
P
y y y y y
5 yy
xœ x œ x
œ xx 4 œ

74  œ œ .
œ
45

74
45

74 Œ
œ
#œ
œ #œ.
œ µœ. œ
F
˙
œ
#w
45 w
5
4
œ
y
y y y.
xœ œ œ xxœ
.
œ
œ

5
4 #œ œ œ. œ œ œ. œ œ
P
y.
y y yy y
y y y yy ..
y 5 yy
x œ x œ x x 4 œ x œ œ x œ x x x .. œ
.
.
œ
œ œ. œ
54
74
74

74
44
#˙

44 # ˙
œ œ
74

74
˙
74
˙
46

œ  œœ œ . œ Â˙
˙
46
46

#w.
74 w .
Œ
#œ. i œ ˙
iœ œ. œ
œ
œ
7
4
y
œ.
œ œ
œ œ œ
46
46
6
4

7 #œ
4
74
74
f
y . y y yy y . 4 y
y y.
y
x œ œ x œ x x x . œ 4 œ x x œ x œ œ x x 74
.
45
œ
#w
44 w
# ww
*
œ œ. œ œ œ.
74
œ
œ
œ


œ
œ œ
P
45
45

36
A.B.
œ. œ
œœ
Œ Œ
‰ Âœ œ œ œ œ Ó
P

œ #œ ˙
œ
œ œ. œ

36
Vib.
œ
94 œ # œ œ
°
49
œ œ ˙.
36
Tbn.
49
.
‰ µœ œ œ œ œ œ œ .

œ µœ . œ
49 ˙
P
œ
œ
f
Œ
49
œ >œ . œ
>w .
w.
36
A. Sx.
œ >œ . œ
œ œ ˙.
32
A.B.
49 µ œ œ œ œ œ œ Œ
F
œ
32
œ œ. œ
6
4
y y y y yy .
y y y y.
y
x œ x œ œ œ x x œ x œ x œ . x x 46
.
.
B b Tpt.
A. Sx.
T. Sx.
Tbn.
4X
& 46 .. µ w .
F
39
>œ . œ œ >œ œ œ . >œ . œ œ >œ œ œ .
& 46 ..
74 µ w .
p
74

µ˙.
& 46 ..
F
>œ .
39
? 46 ..
74

39
˙.
œ œ >œ œ œ . >œ . œ œ >œ œ œ .
Tuba
A.B.
D. S.
B b Tpt.
œ œ. œ

44
45


44
45


44
45


44
˙.
˙.
f
39
? 46 .. ˙ .
˙.
f
39
y
y
y y
yy y
y
ã 46 .. x œ x x œ œ x x œ x x œ œ x œ
.
.
74 ˙ .
œ œ ˙.
45 œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
P
P
.
.. y yy y . y y yy y .
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
74 x x
5
œ œ œ œ. x x œ x œ x œ. x x 4 œ x œ. œ x œ x x x. œ
? 46 ..
74
& 44 Â w
& 44
T. Sx.
& 44 # w
F
w
54 w
f
45

43
œ
œ


#w
? 44

43
#w
& 44 # www
?4
4

#w
w
# ww
43
A.B.
D. S.
#˙

43
? 4 #˙
4
f
43
y
ã 44
œ
x x
y
œ x
˙
#˙
˙
˙
#˙
f
y
˙
y.
œ œ x
y
x
œ
x x
55
y
œ x
f
y.
œ œ x
y
x
œ
œ
44
44

œ œ œ. œ œ œ.
œ œ
44
P
yy y . y y yy y . 4
œ x œ. œ x œ x x x. œ 4
46

..
46

..
46

..
46

..
#w.
64 w .
# ww ..
43
Tuba
w
w

Âw
43
Vib.
œ >œ œ
œ. œ œ

39
>w .
w.
& 46 ..
f
A. Sx.
Tbn.
>œ
O
45
p
>w .
74 w .
P
39
Vib.
74
œ
..
6
4

..
6
4

..
46
Y.
..
Baltimore/Berlin
For Mixed Quintet
Steve Lehman (2008, rev. 2011)
56
Performance Notes
Bb Clarinet
Tenor Trombone with Bucket Mute
Piano
Double Bass with C Extension and Amplifier
Drum Set (Kick Drum, Snare, Piccolo Snare, Hi-Hat, Crash Cymbal, Taped Splash Cymbal, Ride Cymbal)
General:
Accidentals apply only to the note-heads which they precede and do not carry through the measure.
The one exception to this rule applies to consecutive articulations of the same pitch in which case only
one accidental is used for all sequences of two or more
identical pitches.
Quarter-tone, Half-tone, and Three-Quarter-Tone Accidentals are notated in the
following manner:
1/4
Tone
Sharp
1/2
Tone
Sharp
3/4
Tone
Sharp
Grace-note passages should be executed as fast as possible, albeit in a manner that is extremely precise and well
articulated. These passages are notated in the following manner:
Crescendos arising imperceptibly from silence (no audible attack) and decrescendos fading
imperceptibly into silence are notated in the following manner:
Decrescendo
into silence
Crescendo
from silence
57
Performance Notes Continued
Percussion/Drum Set:
The drum set will be scored in the following manner:
Mount Tom
High (5)
Ride
Cymbal (8)
Floor Tom (3)
1
2
3
Kick/Bass
Drum (1)
Cross Stick
(Snare) (2)
4
5
6
7
8
9
Taped Splash
Cymbal (7)
Mount Tom
Low (4)
Closed
Hi-Hat (6)
Crash
Cymbal (9)
Specific drums heads and sizes should be selected according to the notated specifications of
the piece. For example, the written score often calls for short and well articulated attacks from the
bass/kick drum, which would be easily executed by a small bass drum (possibly with a damper) resulting
in a relatively dry and centered sound, capable of being played at several dynamic levels. The
percussionist is encouraged to develop/articulate a personal collection of drum set sounds/timbres within
the specifications of the piece.
The percussionist may wish to use drumsticks with soft mallet heads at the butt of the stick for passages
in which rapid stick changes are called for. All stick changes are notated in the score, with the exception of
those changes resulting in brief cymbal rolls/tremolos found in the midst of drum set literature to be
performed with drum sticks. All cymbal rolls in the piece should be performed with soft mallets whenever
possible and/or practical.
Woodwinds & Brass:
In some instances, when executing crescendi from silence and decrescendi into silence, the trombonist
and/or clarinetist may wish to reinforce the specified dynamic transformation through strategic positioning
of the bell of the musical instrument. For example, the clarinetists/trombonist may wish to point the bell of
his/her instrument directly at the ground, gradually lifting it towards its normal position, when executing a
crescendo from silence (with no audible attack).
58
e
»ª§
Baltimore/Berlin
Organic with Great Rhythmic Precision
S
5
Pno.
5
D. S.
/S/
S
œ œ 7
r #œ
t 5ˆ 5
œ
4 16 œ œ œ
4
#œ #œ
P
°
5
ã 45ˆ16
/S/

S
5
45ˆ16
#œ
œ
#œ
Y.
74 æ
#œ nœ
Soft Mallets
Crash
O
#œ
Ó #œ #œ
 œ
°
y
æ

œ œ œ
œ
œœ
R
#œ Ó.
j #œ
#
œ
#œ nœ
œ
œ.
œ
œ
œ
°
Y.
y

æ Ó
æ
Density Music BMI ©
O
8
4
48
59
Piano
œ
œ œ œœ 2
#œ #œ.
# œ . # œ œ œ 4ˆ 5 œ
t 74ˆ16
3 œ œ # œœ
8
#
œ
4 16
œ j #œ œ 4
œ œ.
œ œœ 4
R
œ
œ.
œ.
œ
R

-̇
P
°
Baltimore/Berlin
t 48
Pno.
8
D. S.
& 48
ã 48

3µ˙
45ˆ16
O
œ. ˙.
J
3 #œ j #˙.
œ # œ œR œ # œœ n œJ . 45ˆ16
#œ #œ
#˙.
#œ
œ
œ
œ.

P 
°
/S/
S

3
45ˆ16

74ˆ16
3 w

œ
74ˆ16
5
œœ
74ˆ16
3 œ œ # œœ
#
œ j #œ œ
œ.

P 
°
S
/S/
y. Y.
74ˆ16
3 Y
æJ æ
æ
O

74ˆ16
5
œ. ˙
J
O
74ˆ16
5
60
B b Cl.
8
Baltimore/Berlin
5
& 74ˆ16
? 74ˆ16
5
11
Tbn.
Pno.
t 74ˆ16
5 #œ #œ.


44ˆ16
5

44ˆ16
5
42 
5 Œ  Œ µw
45ˆ16
O
74

Bucket Mute
42 
5 Œ  Œ
45ˆ16
O
74
œ œ œœ 2
# œ . # œ œ œ 4ˆ 5 œ
4 16
œ œ.
œ œœ 4
R
œ
œ.
œ
˙
R
°
y y. y y. y y
7
5
5
ã 4ˆ16 æ æ æ æ æ R Œ Œ 44ˆ16
11
D. S.

O

24 æY
O
Blend w/Trombone
w
54ˆ16
5 œ œr # œ
œ œ œ 74
œ #œ #œ
P
Blend w/Clarinet
/S/
54ˆ16
5 æy æyR æy Yæ

S
74
61
B b Cl.
11
B b Cl.
Tbn.
Pno.
.
& 74 w

w.
15
? 74

t 74
#œ
œ
? 74
#œ
Y.
7
ã 4 æ
15
D. S.
O
œ
#œ nœ
#œ
œ
#
œ
Ó #œ j
œ œ .#œ
°
O
O
œ œ
R
#œ
œ
°
œ
Ó Œ Œ j
r # œ Âœ œ ˙ .
œ. œ œ œ > >
P

Y
Y.
æ
æ
Pizz.
15
A.B.
œ
15
3:2

48

3
42ˆ16

48

3
42ˆ16
œ #œ nœ œ
œœ
#œ
œ
Ó.
Ó
84
3
œ # œ œR œ œ œJ . 42ˆ16
#
œ
#œ #œ œ
œ
° P
/S/
S
3
48 Œ Œ Œ Œ  # ˙ œ n œ µœ 42ˆ16
>p
fl
>y .
y 8
y y y >Y .
3
J 42ˆ16
æ 4 Œ Œ æ æ æR æ
p

p
62
Baltimore/Berlin
B b Cl.
Tbn.
Pno.
j
2
3
#
œ
œ
ˆ
µ
œ.
& 4 16
O PO
 œ œ #œ.
18
? 2ˆ 3
J
4 16
O PO
18
t 2ˆ 3
4 16
? 42ˆ16
3
A.B.
D. S.
#œ
3
4
˙
˙
3 #˙.
j 4 #˙.
#œ œ .


P P
S
Blend w/Clarinet
/S/
j
œ
µ
œ
n
œ
 >œ > > > .
P F
3:2
18
Y
y y.
2
3
æJ
ã 4ˆ16
p O
18
43
Blend w/Trombone
3:2
œ
P
œ
P
43 œj # œ . œ œ Âœ œ µ œ
> >
äy5:2äy y
y
y
43 æ æ æ
p
5:2
74ˆ16
3 ˙.
7ˆ 3
4 16
5
œ ‰ . Œ Œ Œ 74ˆ16

5
43ˆ16
5
‰ . Œ Œ Œ 74ˆ16

3 5
4ˆ16
O
˙.
œ
O
œ
7ˆ 3 œ œ # œœ
7ˆ 5 # œ # œ . # œ .. # œ œ œ 3ˆ 5
#
œ
#
œ
4 16
j
4 16
4 16
œ
œ œ
R
œ
œ
œ.
œ.


P 
P
°
/S/
S
/S/
74ˆ16
3
#˙
âp
74ˆ16
3 Y

Ó
74ˆ16
5
y.
5
J Œ Œ Œ 74ˆ16
O

5
43ˆ16

5
43ˆ16
63
Baltimore/Berlin
Baltimore/Berlin
Pno.
A.B.
D. S.
Sticks
w/Bass
œ
43 œ
43 œ
>
>y y >y
43 œ
P
44ˆ16
3
˙
œ
>
yy
œ
œ #œ.
>
>y >y .
yœ .
.
#œ
œ
44ˆ16
3 >
œ
F
>y
44ˆ16
3
œ
#œ
#œ nœ
#œ
y
œ
3:2
#œ
Ó
>
œ
>y
yœ
#œ j
œ œ.
°
˘
#œ
œ .. œ
>
˘y äy
y̆ œ œ
.
5
41ˆ16
#œ 5
œ 41ˆ16
>>
œ
>y y y
˘ 1 5
y
œ
œ 4ˆ16
64
œ œ
œ
t 43ˆ16
5 œ
œ
œ
œ
R

°
w/Drums
22
? 43ˆ16
5 3:2 >œ >œ
#œ œ
#
œ
# œ œ > >>
œ œ œ
>>
p
F
22
. Ride >y >y äy >y
Y
5 æ
y
ã 43ˆ16

p
22
Baltimore/Berlin
1 5
& 4ˆ16

4ˆ 5 Œ
4 16
? 1ˆ 5
4 16

4ˆ 5 Œ
4 16
25
Tbn.
Pno.
t 41ˆ16
5
? 41ˆ16
5
25
A.B.
œ
p
°
œ
>
F
5
ã 41ˆ16
œ
P
25
D. S.
œ
œ
œ
> # >œ
3:2
>
>y y
œ œ
r
œ
œ
R
œ
œ #œ #œ

S
#œ
fl
>y
y
œ
44ˆ16
5 Œ
44ˆ16
5
#œ. ˙
J
Blend w/Trombone
O
Âœ. ˙
J
œ
œ
O
Blend w/Clarinet
 j
œ. ˙
P
#œ
œ
>
y 5
44ˆ16
5
œ œ yœ yœ
/S/
œ.
˘y .
yœ .
.
œ
p
> > > œ
œ µœ #œ
>
y- y 3 y >
yœ yœ œ œ
J
3:2
,
œ 2 3
R 4ˆ16
F,
œ
3
R 42ˆ16
F
3 ˙
r 42ˆ16
œ
°
3 œ
42ˆ16
œ
>.
>y
y>
3 y
yœ yœ 42ˆ16
œ

5
4

5
4
j
# œ- .
45
œ œ . œ œ œ 45
> >œ
y
y.
yœ yœ . æJ
.
O
45
65
B b Cl.
25
Baltimore/Berlin
µœ
œ œ œ œ
Rhythmically Precise with Crescs. (!)
& 45

? 45

Blend w/Clarinet
28
Tbn.
Pno.
A.B.
t 45 # œœ b œ
œ œ Œ
bœ œ
œ œ #œ
#œ #œ
œ œ
œ

P

°
5:2
S
28
>
>
? 45
œ œ œ œ >œ
#œ
>
P
28
y
. 5 :2
y
y
æ
ã 45 œ
œ
O
p
p
j
œ œ
D. S.
3
43ˆ16
3
43ˆ16
j
#œ œ
n œ œ
p
‰
œ
r
3:2œ
#œ œ
>
y
y
œ œœ Œ
O
#œ
O
œ
F
F O
œ µœ œ œ
FO
œ
#œ.
F
œ
O
F
# œ- .
J
Rhythmically Precise with Crescs. (!)
3 œ
43ˆ16
°
œ
O
F
œ
œ
45ˆ81
45ˆ81
45ˆ81
/S/
34ˆ16
3 œ
# œ ..
œ #œ.
œ µ3:2œ # œ >
#œ
˘y
>y >y y
34ˆ16
3 y
y̆ y >y
œ œ œ
œ œ
r
œ
5 ˆ81
4
œ #œ #œ
y y >y
y
œœ
Kr
3:2œ
œ
>y
45ˆ81
66
B b Cl.
Blend w/Trombone
28
Baltimore/Berlin
Tbn.
Pno.
˙.
5
1
ˆ
&48
˙.
30
? 45ˆ81
t 5ˆ1
48
œ
œœ
F
˙
#œ #œ
œ
? 5ˆ1 ä
48 œ
F
30
˘y
5
1
ˆ
ã 4 8 œ ..

Œ
30
A.B.
D. S.
P
µœ
>y
y
œ
œ
 j œ #œ Œ
œ. œ œ
p F
°
> >
# >œ œ µ œ œ
œ
y ˘
y y
œ œ
y
y
œ œ
œ
œœ
f
y3
y
Œ
#œ #œ
œ
œ
y
y
œ
œ
J
O
œ
J
F
œ
œ
3:2

# >œ
rK
3:2œ
j œ
œ .œ
P
°
œœ
#
œ
#œ
fl fl œ >œ .
>
>
>y
y y
3:2
y y
y y
œœ œ
œ
rK
œ
œ
#œ
#œ
œ
O
‰

œ œ
>
>y
y >y y
y
y
œ œ œ
œ
67
B b Cl.
>œ
30
Baltimore/Berlin
&
˙.
?
31
Tbn.
Pno.
t
?
31
A.B.
31
D. S.
ã
˙
Ó.
O
˙
F
O
œ
œœ
°
#œ #œ
œ

œ
F
˘y
œ ..
P
œ
Œ
>y
yœ
œ
 j œ #œ
Œ
œ. œ œ
 F
°
>œ µ >œ œ
# >œ
œ
y ˘
yœ yœ
y
y œ œ
œ
œœ
f
y3
y
#œ #œ
œ
Œ
œ
y
yœ

# >œ
j
œ.
P
°
Kr
3:2œ
#œ œ œ
#œ
fl fl œ >œ .
>
>
>y
y y
3:2
y
yœ
œœ œ y y
rK
œ
œ
œ
œ
#œ

#œ
œ
œ
J
œ
J
38
‰
38
O
38
38
œ œ
>
>y
y >y y
yœ œ œ y œ 38
68
B b Cl.
31
Baltimore/Berlin
? 38

œ µ œ # œ 78 Ó .
œ
>
>
P
Â˙
7

8
& 38


32
32
Tbn.
32
Pno.
t 38 # œ
œ
p
? 38
32
A.B.
ã 38
32
D. S.
Âœ œ
 R R 
j
œ
Kr r
5œ :2œ
>
j
œ
F
yy
J
P
‰
‰
O
œ
œ #œ
œ
># œ œ œ # œ
>
>
>y yy y y
œ
œ
78 Ó
œ.
j
œ
œ
>œ µ >œ
r j
5œ :2œ
y.
y5 :2
œ . œ yœ œ
r j
œ œ
78
˙- .
P
°
‰
œ
œ œ
#œ œ œ
>

# œ 78
j
œ
œ œ œ
œ
>
>
>
P
>y j
>y y
>y
78
yœ
œ œy yœ œ œ y œ
J >
P
,
F
œ
>
P
j
œ
#œ œ
j
œ œ
œ
>
>f > >
>y y
>
˘y
yœ yœ y̆ œ œ yœ
74ˆ16
5
74ˆ16
5
74ˆ16
5
74ˆ16
5
74ˆ16
5
74ˆ16
5
69
B b Cl.
& 38 œJ
P
,
,
Baltimore/Berlin
5 Ó
& 74ˆ16
? 74ˆ16
5
35
Tbn.
Œ
Â˙.
35
Pno.
t 74ˆ16
5
wp
°
? 74ˆ16
5
35
A.B.
D. S.
#œ
>
F
35
.
7ˆ 5 æy
ã 4 16
O
˙
P
µ œ.
,
œ-
O
F
O
7 5
& 4ˆ16 œ .

µœ
œ œ
>
œ
>
œ œ.
>
P
˘
œœ .
#œ
œ œ.
fl
y > ˘ >y >y ˘ y- .
æ yœy
œ œ.
P
œ
>
œ
>œ œ .
O
3
j ‰. r
œ
œ œ.
>


>œ œ
œ
>.
> >
>y yy y ˘y .
œ
œ.
3
O
P
œ œ
>
P
.
-̇
P
Œ
œ
œ œ µœ
>
>
>y y
˘
y
œ œ
œ
r j
5œ :2œ
œ
f
y
. œ
œ. œ
3
 46ˆ16
,
œ
œ
3
R 46ˆ16
O
P
,
# œ œ̆ œ̆ ˘œ
6 3

4ˆ16

F
Œ
3
r 46ˆ16
œ
œp
#œ œ
P
>y .
y.
˘
yœ
3
r 46ˆ16
œ
6 3
4ˆ16
70
B b Cl.
35
Baltimore/Berlin
B b Cl.
Pno.
3
& 46ˆ16
36
t 6ˆ 3
4 16
? 6ˆ 3
4 16
36
A.B.
3
ã 46ˆ16
36
D. S.
µ˙
œ œ Âœ
P
O
# ˙P
°
5:2
>
>
#œ
œ
F
5:2
>y
˘
y œ œy
fl
P
rK r
6œ :2œ
>j
œ
>y
œ
p
œ
â
˘
yœ œ
.
rK r
6œ :2œ
œ #œ Âœ
œ
œ
#œ
â
>y y .
y œ æ
O
>œ
˙
œ.
>
y >y >y
æ y œ
pP
œ
rK r
6œ :2œ
µ œ nœ. Âœ.
œ
fl
œ œ
>
>y
>y
œ œ œ y̆
œ œ œ Âœ #œ
œ 5
4
rK r
5œ :2œ
w/Drums
j
œ- .
œ œ
> >
5
4
5
4
5 :2
>y y
˘y 5
yœ yœ y œ yœ y 4
w/Clarinet
rK r
œ œ
71
Expressive and Precise as if
in an Imaginary Folk Idiom...
Baltimore/Berlin
5µœ
&4
? 5 ‰.
4
37
Tbn.
& 45 Œ
37
Pno.
œ
t5 .
4 œ
p
°
?5
4 ˙
>
F
>y .
37
ã 45 y .
P
D. S.
O
>œ .
>œ
‰ œ
J
P
œ œ
37
A.B.
‰
œ œ
R
O
äy y
œ
œ
œ
#
œ
µ
>
>
# >œ œ  œ
  œ # œ Âœ
R

>œ œ
>œ P œ œ
œ
œ.
œ.
P
>œ œ
œ œ
œ
œ.
µ˙
>
œ.
y äy .
y
y.
œ
œ
œ œ
>y
œ
>
y̆
O
œ
œ
>p
œ
>y
c œ.
c
œŒ
O
œ
p œ
°
c ‰
j
4:3œ
P
#œ
Œ
œ
µ >œ .
>y äy y
y y
c
°

œ
œ
œ
>
y
7
4
Œ
µ œ- œ- œ- œ- œ- œ- œ- œ- œ- . œ- œ
j
4:3œ
c Œ
c
Œ
>œ
>œ
3:2œ
œ
œ.
äy .
y.
œ.
O
74
P
œ
 74
œ
7
4
7
nœ 4
>
˘y
7
œ 4
72
B b Cl.
37
r
7:4œ
Baltimore/Berlin
& 74  œ
œ
& 74
Œ
O
œ
39
Pno.
A.B.
t7
4 œ
p
°
39
?7 Œ
4
Mallets
y
7
ã 4æ
39
D. S.
>
œ
#œ œ œ
O
œ
‰.
y.
æ
P

#œ.
œ
3
>
>
œ
œ
œ
œ
P
œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
>
P
œ
r
œ ˙
â
F
y y
æ æ
O
Rhythmically Precise with Crescs. (!)
œ.
>3
F
y y.
æ æ
P O
>
f
>
F
3
#œ œ
œ
y
æ
P
œ
â
F
y
æ
O
p
3
œ
˙
y y
æ æ
P O
O
Œ
œ
#œ.
F
Ó
ä
y y . Ride Yæ
P
˙
°
S

48

48
# ˙- .

Œ Œ Œ
8
4
8
4
48
73
B b Cl.
39
Baltimore/Berlin
8
&4 Ó
Ó
41
Pno.
t 48
#œ
œ œ
b
œ
œ
œ
œœ
œ #œ

-̇ .

˙.
# ˙- .
Y-
/S/
ã 48 Ó .
41
D. S.
& 74 
Ó.#œ œ œ œ
44
Pno.
t 74
˙

°
/S/
ã 74 Œ
44
D. S.
y-

œ
y-

Œ
#œ.
#œ œ #œ
#œ #˙.
y- y-
œ- œ
y-
9
4
Ó
Œ
49 ˙
˙
S
49 Œ
Ó
œ
p
45
45
y-

45 # ˙
˙
y-
5
4

# wŒ Œ
y-
48
œ . œ ..
œ
Œ Œ Œ Œ
# >œ >œ >œ œ . œ œ

45 w
# w
°.
54 æY
O

O
yæ

œ
œ
Œ
7
4
74
74
74
œ œ œ
74
R 48
‰ œ #œ #œ
Ó
Œ
j #œ
#
œ
œ œ œ.
œ.
˙
œ
œ
œ
/S/
S
œ

y- y- y
74
R 48
Œ ‰.

74
˙
Very Fast & Very Well Articulated...
Baltimore/Berlin
& 74

O
? 74

‰
47
Tbn.
>
b b # œœœœœ œœœœœ ....
.
& 74
p
47
Pno.
t 74
? 74
47
A.B.
7
ã 4
47
D. S.
œ

ä
#œ
P
äy
P
Sticks
>
œœœœ œœœœ œœœœ œœœ œœœ œœœ œ . œ
œ. œ œ
ä
œ. œ œ
äy
y >œ
œ
,
˙.
˙
P
4:3 - 4:3
µ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ4:3 œ œ œ œ4:3 œ œ
˙.
ä
œ œ
œ
œ œ
œ
y äy
y

ä
>y . y
y̆ œ
.
j
œ
j
œ
P
O

ä
œ œ. œ œ
p P
°
œ œ. œ Œ
O
j
œ
>y
yœ
ä
œ
p
Œ
>y
yœ
-̇

Œ
. œ
O
3
‰ 46ˆ16
O
Ó
ä
œ
j
œ
3
46ˆ16
Œ
ä
œ
˙
P 3
œ >œ >œ >œ

>y y >y y
F
y y
y̆ œæ æ
3
46ˆ16
3
46ˆ16
3
46ˆ16
6 3
4ˆ16
75
B b Cl.
47
Baltimore/Berlin
3 Œ
& 46ˆ16

? 46ˆ16
3 
49
Tbn.
œ . œ . œ œ >œ . >œ
w/Drums
Œ
Remove Mute
A.B.
D. S.
6ˆ 3 Œ ä
& 4 16
# œœœ œœœ œœ .. ˙˙
n œœœ
#
n
œ. ˙
P
â
â
°
t 46ˆ16
3
Ó
Œ 
œ
°
œ
49
? 46ˆ16
3
œ
#
œ
œ . œ > >œ . œ œ # œ # œ
> Closed
>
f
>
3
49
äy .
y > y . Hi-Hat
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
6 3
ã 4ˆ16 y y œ . y̆ y̆ y œ . y y œ y œ y .
F
fl
P
O
49
Pno.
œ.
J
> > fl
j
œœœ ..
.
œ. œ œ
44ˆ16
3 ˙
44ˆ16
3
>œ . >œ . œ œ œ .
4ˆ 3
4 16 # œœ
œ
â
44ˆ16
3 
44ˆ16
3
œ
œ >œ
>
y 3
y œ œ 44ˆ16
y̆ y̆
.
w/Trombone
O
œœœ
â
‰
Œ
‰
j
œ
œœœ .. œœ œœ
.œ œ
â
j
œ. 5 1
J 4ˆ16
µ œ œ µœ.
F
45ˆ161
5 1
j 4ˆ16
œœœ ...
‰ . 45ˆ161
j 5 1
œ . 4ˆ16
œ # œ >œ # >œ œ . >œ œ
>y y y ˘ >y y >y y y y5 y y
y œ
yyœ
y y œ 45ˆ161
>>
76
B b Cl.
œ
w
Just Loud Enough to Color the Ensemble Texture...
49
Baltimore/Berlin
œ
? 5ˆ 1 Ó
4 16
Œ
51
Tbn.
ä
5
1
ˆ
& 4 16
œœ # œœ
#
˙
œ
œœ # œ # œ
P ˙
â â
°̇
51
? 5ˆ 1
4 16 # ˙
œ œ œ
>
f
fl >
51
5 :2
y
y
y y y y y >y y y
5
1
y
ã 4ˆ16
œ
51
Pno.
A.B.
j
œ œ
D. S.
œ.
F > fl
˙
œ
‰ J
O
œ
œ 5 #w
5 1
R 4
4ˆ16
3 ,
3:2
,
,
j
j µœ.
Â
œ
n
œ
µ
œ
œ
# œ  œ . # œ.
œ œ
œ
œ
J ‰‰
5 1
R 45 Œ Œ
4ˆ16
and Precise as if p
F
F Expressive
in an Imaginary Folk Idiom...
Kr
œ
r 45
˙˙˙
œœœ
œœœ œœœ # # œœœ ... œœœ
â
â
r 5
#œ
#œ œ 4 #œ œ
œ
>
>
œ. œ. œ.
>
3:2 >
y ˘ > y >y > >y y >y
y
y
y
y
y
.
y
y . y y 45 y y
y y y
œ œ
œ
j
œ
>
fl
j
œ
œœ n n œœœ
â
3
œœ
œ
45ˆ161
5 1
j œ œ
4ˆ16
œ œ >
>
>y y 3:2 yy y >y y y y 5 1
œ 4ˆ16
>
j
3:2œ
j
œ
77
B b Cl.
5ˆ 1 ˙
& 4 16

51
Baltimore/Berlin
Pno.
A.B.
j
œ œ
D. S.
œ
F
# # œœœ
˙˙˙
œ
>
œ
y
y
y
œ
R

r
œœœ
y.
>y y
y.
#œ
>
y
œ
>
y3
>
y
>
r
œ
>
>y
y œ
46ˆ161
46ˆ161
6 1
4ˆ16
46ˆ161
78
B b Cl.
#w
5
1
& 4ˆ16

53
ä
5
1
& 4ˆ16 ˙
˙˙
œœœ # # œœœ
> >
P
53
°
? 5ˆ 1
4 16
# ˙œ >œ
>
f
5
:2
53
>y y ˘ >y
y y > >
>
5
1
y
y
y y
ˆ
ã 4 16
œ
53
Baltimore/Berlin
Tbn.
#w.
6
1
ˆ
& 4 16

œ 3 1 #˙.
R 4ˆ 8

10:8
j - µ œ˙
µœ œ œ
# œ µ œ . # œ n œ n œ µ œ # œ n œ µ œ # œÂ œ
54
? 46ˆ161 ‰
R 43ˆ81
‰.
Œ ‰J
O
P
F
& 46ˆ161
54
Pno.
? 6ˆ 1
4 16
54
A.B.
ã 46ˆ161
54
D. S.
ä
# # œœœ
P
°
#œ
>
f
y >y >y y >
œ. y
F
Kr
œ
œœœ œœœ ... œœœ
â
œ
y
œ. œ
>
>y >
y y
œ
O
r 43ˆ81
œœœ
œœœ ... # # œœœ
# œœœ
â
â
3
r 43ˆ81 œ
j#œ
œ
#œ #œ > œ œ
œ
> >
> >
> ># >œ œ . >
>
>
y y3 y y y y ˘y 3 1 y y y3:2 y y y
y.
y yœ œ
œ y y y œ yR 4ˆ8
fl
>
>> >
œœ œj ˙
œ #œ ˙
â ✠˙
3
r
œ
œ 5 1
J 4ˆ16

‰ 45ˆ161
5 ˆ161
j
4
œœœ n œœ . œœ
œ .. œ
â
j 5ˆ 1
#
œ
œ œ . > 4 16
>
y >y . >y >
y 45ˆ161
79
B b Cl.
54
B b Cl.
˙
5
1
& 4ˆ16

? 5ˆ 1 Œ
4 16
56
Tbn.
5 1
& 4ˆ16
56
Pno.
D. S.
ä
? 45ˆ161
#˙
>
f
œ.
Âœ œ
‰ J
F
j
œ
œ
œœœ # # œœ # # œœœ
â â
˙˙˙
P
t 45ˆ161 °

56
A.B.
œ
56
˙
F
œ 8
R 4
œ
R 48
w

Œ
œ
Œ
Bucket Mute
>œ
œœ
ä
8
œ
r 4
... œ
˙
œ
#
œ
œ
˙˙
œœ
œ
œ
# œ œ
P

°
8
Œ  4
# ˙- .

œ œ œ # >œ
> >
5 :2
>y . y äy
56
>y y y Ride
y
y
y
y
y
5
1
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
.
ã 4ˆ16
œ
F
> fl > >
F
j
œ œ
œ
˙
O
r
œ
>
>y
y
R
48 # ˙ .
â
P
äy
48
p
Œ
œœ
œœ
œ
µœ œ
‰ J
O
œœ
œœ
œ
‰
Œ
j
œ- œ
p
œ ‰. Ó
R
O
˙
œ. œ
p
O
œœ- .
..
œ
œ
 œ ..
J

Œ
˙˙
˙˙
˙
Œ
Œ
‰ # œj œ Ó
Œ
pâ
>y . >y y . >y y y >y y . >y y >y . y >y yy. y y. y y
y y y. y y
80
Baltimore/Berlin
Baltimore/Berlin
Pno.
D. S.
8
4
48
48
81
>œ
Creating a Dark, Undulating, Resonant Texture
with Individual Pitches and Attacks Virtually Imperceptible...
œœ
5
8
31



& Œ Œ Œ # œœœœ Ó Œ Œ 4
4
4ˆ 8

p

t Œ Œ Œ Œ Œ Œ 45 œ Œ 
3ˆ81

48
4
œ
WW
# œœ#œ nœ
WW
S
°
°
,
China
-̇
-̇ . ä̇ . ä̇
Soft
Mallets
58
y Y y y Y.
æ
æ y æ
ΠΠΠ48

ã
45
43ˆ81
O
P O
 p P
P
58
Baltimore/Berlin
& 48

?8
4

62
Tbn.
8
&4
t 48
? 48
62
A.B.
œ

# >œ >œ ä̇ .
Œ
Ó

O
O
ä̇

WW
y y Y
8
ã 4 Œ æ æ æ
O

62
D. S.
WW

°
#w
Œ Œ Œ
Just Loud Enough to Color the Ensemble Texture...

62
Pno.
Œ

As Quiet as Possible with Audible Fragments...
Point Bell Towards Ground as Necessary...
Arco
WW

#w
Œ
O
äy
p
WW
œ
O
Ó
8:6
7
Œ Œ ‰ # œ  œ .# œ œ # œ µ œ .# œ µ œ œ 16
µœ

7
Ó.
16
Œ

Œ
# œ3:2˙
œ
WW


Œ
>œ
O
Œ Œ

WW
Ó.
äy y Rhythmically Precise with Crescs. (!)
y
y yyy yy y œ
œ
œ
œ
œ
œ
æ æ æ æ æ æ æ œœ
Œ Œ
æ Œ Œ
O
O
O
O
p 

Toms should be Played Freer Rhythmically...
>œ
µœ

y
p
7
16
7
16
7
16
7
16
82
B b Cl.
62
Baltimore/Berlin
Tbn.
Pno.
e
»ª§
r
œ
O
°
? 16
7 œ
µœ
J
65
D. S.

>
> > >
>
>
t 16
7 > >
œ œ
œ œ
œ œ
œ œ
œœ œ œœ œ œœ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ
7
ã 16
65
œ.
J

œ.
J
O
A.B.
Tempo Changes Established by Piano and
Articulated by Conductor
5:3
œ
Âœ  œ # œ œ
#
œ
œ #œ
7 œ
& 16
œ
65
? 16
7
»ª™

œ
R
O
>
>
>
> > > >
>
œ œ
œ œ
œ œ œ œ
œœ œ œœ œ œœ œœ œ œœ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œ

Quiet and Rhythmic...

y
æ
O
y.
æJ
p
83
B b Cl.
65
e
»••
Baltimore/Berlin
Sounding and Feeling Rubato
While Remaining Rhythmicallly Locked...
B b Cl.
Pno.
D. S.
& Œ
# >œ
67
& J
p
67
œ.

>œ .
œ # œ Âœ
œ
J
>
>
>
> > >
t > >
œ œ
œœ œ œœ œ œ œœ œ œœ œ œ œ
œ
œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ #œ #œ #œ #œ #œ

°
67
œ
œ
œ
œ
ã
p
Toms should be Played Freer Rhythmically...
e
»•¢
œ
#œ œ µœ#œ  œ
rK
8:6œ
# >œ
J
>œ .
œ.
œ.
J
O
œ
J
>
> > > >
œ œ
œœ œ œœ œ œ œœ œ œœ œ œ œ
œ
œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ
>
œœ ..
J
>
>
‰
œ
œœ
84
e
Baltimore/Berlin
&
»•º

? ‰.

&
Pno.
A.B.
œ
p
#œ  œ
œ.
J
>œ .
J
O
>
>
> > >
> > >
> > > >
>
t
œ œ
œ œ
œ œ œœ œ œ œœ œ œœ œ œ œ
œ œ œœ œ œ œœ œ œœ œ œ œ
œ
œ
œ
œ
œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ œ œ œ œ œ #œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ

69
µœ.
œ
µœ
? ‰.
J
>
ã ‰.
69
D. S.
r
5:3œ
# >œ
O
69
»¶§ œ # œ # œ
µœ œ

µœ
69
Tbn.
e
>
>

Crash y
æJ
O
y
æJ
y
æ

O
y.
æJ
85
B b Cl.
69
e
B b Cl.
»¶™
& œ
# >œ
71
71
&
Pno.
D. S.
p
œ.

œ.
>œ .
J
œ
#œ œ #œ œ
µœ
# œÂ œ # œ  œJ .
rK
8:6œ

> > >
>
> > >
>
>
>
> > >
>
t > >
œ œ
œ œ
œ œ
œ œ
œ œ
œ œ
œ
œ
œ
œ
œ
œ
œ
œ
œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ œœ # œ # œ # œ œ # œ # œ # œ # œ # œ œ # œ # œ œ # œ # œ œ # œ # œ

°
71
y
œ œœ œœ
.
æ
‰
Œ
ã
O
p
86
e
Baltimore/Berlin
Baltimore/Berlin
& œR
? ‰

73
Tbn.
Loud Enough/Color...
œ.
µœ
J
O
Pno.
A.B.
>
>
>
> >
>
œ.
J
O
# >œ .
>
>
p
œ
R
> > >
> >
>
>
>
œ œ
œ œ
œ œ
œ œ
œ œ
œ œ
œ œ
œ œ
#œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ nœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ

°
73
µœ
œ
œ.
œ.
? ‰
R
O

t
73
D. S.
œ

73
&
œ.
J
œ µ œ3 # œ œ .
ã
œ
p
œ.
œ œ œœ

87
B b Cl.
œ.
73
Baltimore/Berlin
B b Cl.
75
&
?
œ
75
Tbn.
75
&
Pno.
A.B.
D. S.
t
# >œ .
œ #œ #œ œ µ œ œ
#œ #œ œ  œ


p
>
rK
9:6œ
œ
R
‰.
œ
œ.
J
œ
œ œ #œ µ œ.
œ
œ.
J
O


œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ
œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ. œ
#œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ #œ #œ #œ œ #œ #œ œ #œ œ #œ #œ #œ
nœ œ.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


°
75
µœ
œ
œ.
?

‰.
R

75
y
y.
y
y.
y
y.
æ
æ
æJ
æJ
æJ
ã æ
O
O
O
O


Rhythmically Precise with Crescs. (!)
88
Sounding More and More
Rhythmically Locked...
B b Cl.
78
&
?
78
Tbn.
Pno.
t
œ
œ
?œ
78
A.B.
y-
China
78
D. S.
ã

Baltimore/Berlin
Seven 32nds = One 1/4th
Following Piano Attacks
œ.
œ
J 46 Œ Œ
œ.
J 46
O
œ. œ
»••
œ œ.
œ.
J
O
#œ
µ œ . # œ œ µœ # œ œ
j
#
œ
# œ œj
4
3
µ œ œ ˙ Œ Œ Œ 4ˆ16 ‰ œ Âœ ˙ œ .
Œ Œ Âœ
œ µœ
J
J
O


44ˆ16
3



6
4 œ œ œ #˙ œ #œ
#œ
P
°
6

4
y . Sticks
J 46 Œ Œ Œ
yŒŒ ‰ J
p
Kr
8:6œ
œœ
œ

y
#˙
˙ œ #œ
p
y- Y- -̇
Ride
China
4ˆ 3
4 16 # œ4ˆ 3
4 16
44ˆ16
3 Œ
5
46ˆ16
5
46ˆ16
-̇
œ- œ- . 6ˆ 5
œ . 4 16
J

6 5
4ˆ16
>
y y y y >y 6 5
æ æ
4ˆ16

O
89
e
Baltimore/Berlin
5
& 46ˆ16
Tbn.
? 46ˆ16
5
Pno.
t 6ˆ 5
4 16
82
#œ nœ

? 6ˆ 5 Œ
4 16
82
A.B.
Y
6
5
ã 4ˆ16 æ
82
D. S.
O
œ
œœ
#œ

3
43ˆ16

3
43ˆ16


œ µ œj .
O F O
 œ œ#œ.
3
J
42ˆ16
O F O
3 #œ
42ˆ16
œ 3ˆ 3 œ œ œ œ œ . 2ˆ 3
#œ
j
R 4 16 # œ . # œ œ J 4 16
œ
œ œ .
p
P P
Pizz.
>
3ˆ 3
3 œ
j 42ˆ16
Œ Œ Œ
4
16
# œ >œ >œ
#œ œ #œ. œ
# œ œ # >œ œ ✠.
>
F
 p PF
>
>
>
>
y >y >y y y >y y 3 3 y . y y y y y 2 3 y y y >y y
y y 4ˆ16
y 4ˆ16
y
æ
œ
p P
P
ŒÓ
œ #œ
#œ #œ œ
°
43 ˙
43
˙
3 #˙.
4 #˙.
p
œ
F
œ
F
74ˆ16
3
74ˆ16
3
7ˆ 3
4 16
3
7 3
4 # ˙ # œ œ 4ˆ16
>
> >
>y >y y >y y
>y 7 3
34
4ˆ16
90
B b Cl.
82
Baltimore/Berlin
3 ˙.
& 74ˆ16
? 74ˆ16
3
86
Tbn.
Pno.
D. S.
O
œ
O
‰. Œ Œ Œ
‰. Œ Œ Œ
œœ
t 74ˆ16
3 œ œ # œœ
#
#œ œ
œ j
œ
œ.

P 
°
œ.
? 74ˆ16
3
# ˙˙.
œ j
œ. œ
P
>
â
>
>
y >y y y
y y> y- y .
86
3
y
y
yy y
ã 74ˆ16
œ
œ
P
86
A.B.
˙.
œ
Kr j
7œ :œ
rK j
7œ :œ
74ˆ16
5 µœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ. œ. Ó
> >>
>> O
> > > F
µœ
œ. œ. œ œ.
74ˆ16
5
Ó
O
O
p
74ˆ16
5 #œ
P
°
#œ. #œ
#œ.
œ œ.
 œ.
œ
Rœ
Lock w/Clarinet & Drums...
74ˆ16
5
#œ
#œ.
>
>
Lock w/Piano & Clarinet...
>y . y
>y
>y
74ˆ16
5 y
y
œ.
œ œ
> .
>y .
y
y æ

œ.
>y y
œ
P
œ
Œ
5
 44ˆ16
Œ
5
 44ˆ16
œ
44ˆ16
5
44ˆ16
5
œ œ
> >
3
>y >y y y
5
y
y 44ˆ16
œ
>>>
91
B b Cl.
86
Lock w/Piano & Drums...
Baltimore/Berlin
> >> > >
>
7 :
7 :
3
3
3
>>
4
5
2
5
5
& 4ˆ16 µ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ 4  4ˆ16 Œ  µœ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ œ 74
O
O
F


F
˙
œ
µ˙
µ˙
˙
œ œ
88
? 44ˆ16
5
5 Œ 
74
R 42  45ˆ16
O
O
O
O
P
P
Lock w/Clarinet & Drums...
Lock w/Clarinet & Drums...
œ
œ œ
r#œ
œ œœ 2
t 4ˆ 5 œ5ˆ 5
7
œ
4 16
4 16 œ œ œ
4
œ œœ 4
#
œ
#
œ
œR

° P 
â̇
°
> >> >>
B b Cl.
Tbn.
Pno.
88
rK j
5œ :œ
? 4ˆ 5 >œ
œ
4 16
> œ.
F
88
>y >y >y >y
5
y y
ã 44ˆ16
œ
88
A.B.
D. S.
Kr j
5œ : œ
P
rK j
7œ : œ
Lock w/Piano & Clarinet...
rK j
œ œ
rK j
7œ :œ
>œ
>y
œ
w/Drums
>y
œ
œ
>œ œ œ
>y y y >y
y
y
r
2
5 5
4  4ˆ16 œ œ
F
>y y y
5
42  45ˆ16
P
˙
œ #œ
-y >y y3 >7 : > y>
y
y yy y y y
œ
œ
rK j
œ œ
w/Clarinet
rK j
œ œ
œ
7
#œ. 4
y y3 > y >
y y 74
œ
>
92
> >> >>
Lock w/Piano & Drums...
B b Cl.
w/Drums
& 74 Œ
91
Tbn.
? 74 Œ
Pno.
t 74
91

ã 74 Œ
91
D. S.
œ
? 74 Œ
91
A.B.
#œ
#œ
#œ nœ
#œ
Kr j
7œ :œ
Kr j
7œ :œ
> 7 : >>
Kr j
œ œ
Kr j
7œ :œ
> >
Œ µœ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ œœ œ œ œ œ œ
> >>
>> F

˙
œ
µ˙
Œ
O
p
Lock w/Clarinet & Drums...
œ
œ
#
œ
#
œ
Ó
j #œ
œ
.
œ
p
°
>
>
ä
>
Œ
j #œ
#œ
œ
œ
.
œ
F 3
>
7 :
7 :
>y >y
7 :
7
:
y
yy y y y y y y y y
>y yy y y y y y y y y .
Œ œ
œ
œ
J
>
> >
â
>
>
>
>
>
F
3
Kr j
œ œ
w/Clarinet
Kr j
œ œ
rK j
œ œ
Kr j
œ œ
œ 45

45

r 45
œ

O
O
œ
U
R 45
#œ
p w
°
y
yy Y˙
y 45
R
F
Ride & China
93
Baltimore/Berlin